Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

METHODIST CHURCH UNION BILLS.

Order [30th January] that the Methodist Church Union Bill be committed and Order [12th February] that the Methodist Church Union (Scotland) Bill be committed read and discharged; Bills committed to a Select Committee at Seven Members, Four to be nominated by the House and Three by the Committee of Selection.

Ordered,
That all Petitions against the Bill presented five clear days before the meeting of the Committee be referred to the Committee; that the Petitioners praying to be heard by themselves, their counsel, or agents, be heard against the Bill, and counsel be heard in support of the Bill.

Ordered,
That the Committee have power to send for persons, papers, and records.

Ordered,
That Four be the quorum.

Ordered,
That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power, if they think fit, to consolidate the Methodist Church Union Bill and the Methodist Church Union (Scotland) Bill into one Bill."—[Mr. Ammon.]

MINISTRY OF HEALTH PROVISIONAL ORDERS (No. 2) BILL.

Read a Second time, and committed.

Oral Answers to Questions — GRIFFITH JOHN COLLEGE, HANKOW (OCCUPATION).

Sir ROBERT THOMAS: 1.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he is aware that Griffith John College, the London Missionary Society's centre near Hankow, has been occupied by Chinese military forces and 1,000
troops billeted there; and will he take action through diplomatic channels to have the premises evacuated?

The SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Sir Austen Chamberlain): This occupation of mission property took place on 31st December. Representations were at once made locally and to the Nanking Government, and by 17th January the troops had been withdrawn.

Oral Answers to Questions — LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

COAL INQUIRY.

Mr. WELLOCK: 3.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what progress has been made by the committee appointed by the Economic Organisation of the League of Nations to inquire into the coal question?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: A meeting; of experts from a number of countries was held at Geneva from 8th to 12th January, to consult with a Sub-Committee of the Economic Committee of the League. I understand that as a result of the meeting the information already collected was supplemented and brought up to date, and that some discussion took place on general aspects of the question. There were no resolutions and no report has been published.

Mr. WELLOCK: Has the right hon. Gentleman any information which goes to show that the results will be fruitful?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I can hardly say what the results will be at the present time. I hope they will be fruitful, but it is only a hope that I can express.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Is any report of the proceedings likely to be circulated?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I think a report will be made by the Committee to the Council of the League when they next meet in March, and in that case no doubt it will be published in due course.

MINORITIES QUESTION.

Mr. L'ESTRANGE MALONE: 14.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received any communication from the Secretary-General of the League of Nations
regarding the request made by the Government of the German Reich that the League of Nations guarantee for the provisions relating to the protection of minorities shall be placed on the agenda of the next session of the League of Nations Council; whether he can state what aspects of the minorities question will be raised; and whether His Majesty's representative on the Council will support and, if needful, himself bring forward again, the proposal which was made at the last Assembly of the League, that a Permanent Minorities Commission should be created on the analogy of the Permanent Mandates Commission?

Sir A, CHAMBERLAIN: I have received a copy of the provisional agenda for the next meeting of the Council of the League of Nations, on which the matter referred to by the hon. Member appears. I am unable to state in advance to what particular aspects of the minorities question the attention of the Council will be directed. As regards the last part of the question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Dewsbury, (Mr. Riley) on 6th December, to the effect that His Majesty's Government were not aware of any intention to revive the suggestion of forming a Permanent Minorities Commission. That is still the position, and His Majesty's Government do not propose to raise the question themselves.

Oral Answers to Questions — MR. LEON TROTSKY.

Mr. DAY: 5.
asked the Secretary of State, for Foreign Affairs whether any application has been made to the British Government by the Soviet Government of Russia to allow Mr. Leon Trotsky to visit Great Britain; and, if so, what reply has been given by the British Government?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: His Majesty's Government has received no such application.

Mr. DAY: Can the right hon. Gentle man say whether application has been made by the man himself?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir.

Mr. MacLAREN: May I ask whether, if Mr. Leon Trotsky, would change his name to "Day" or to "Morrow," he would receive consideration?

Oral Answers to Questions — BRITISH SUBJECTS (DETENTION, BELGIUM).

Mr. WHEATLEY: 6.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs if the detention of the hon. Member for Bridgeton and his friends by the Belgian authorities at Ostend has been reported to him; and if he has taken any steps to obtain an explanation and apology from the Belgian Government and to prevent a repetition of such indignity to British citizens travelling on the Continent with passports issued by His. Majesty's Government?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: Yes, Sir, my attention was called to this incident. I did not consider that any representations to the Belgian Government were called for, inasmuch as the exclusion of any alien from the national soil is a sovereign right inherent in every Government. The possession of a British passport is not in itself a guarantee of admsision to a foreign country.

Mr. WHEATLEY: Is the right hon. Gentleman bearing in mind the fact that the passport issued in his name to my hon. Friend the Member for Bridgeton (Mr. Maxton) before he left this country reads as follows:
…request and require in the name of His Majesty's Government all those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance and to afford him every assistance and protection of which he may stand in need.
Does not the right hon. Gentleman consider that, in view of that request and requirement, the treatment of these members by the Belgian Government in the manner that has been described is an act of discourtesy to the Foreign Office?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I am well aware of the terms in which passports are drawn up, and I have, indeed, considered whether in the present circumstances some modification ought not to be introduced, or a different form used in certain cases. I have decided that on the whole the inconvenience of that course would be greater than any benefit to be derived from it. But the passport is issued subject to the general principles of international law, and they allow the right to a State, which, we claim and exercise for ourselves, to exclude aliens if they see fit to do so.

Mr. WHEATLEY: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if he would treat this matter so lightly and in the same manner if the people concerned were his own colleagues on the Front Bench?

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Would the right hon. Gentleman explain what he means by the expression "in certain cases"? Are passports proposed to be issued subject to the political opinions held by those to whom they are issued, and is it too much to ask the Foreign Secretary, if possible, to put aside political prejudice in this matter? [Interruption.]

Mr. SPEAKER: That hardly arises out of the question on the Paper.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Are we to understand, from the right hon. Gentleman's answer to my right hon. Friend the Member for Shettleston (Mr. Wheatley), that people belong to a certain group who disagree with him are to be treated, not as citizens, but as people differing from him?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: No, Sir. Obviously, the hon. Gentleman did not catch the answer I gave. I said that I had considered whether there should be any differentiation in the form of passports, and had come to the conclusion that it was undesirable to make such differentiation.

Mr. THURTLE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it is quite a breach of accepted practice for the Belgian Government to treat a British Member of Parliament as an undesirable alien?

Mr. SPEAKER: That would not be a suitable question to ask here.

Mr. MAXTON: Could the right hon. Gentleman not have taken steps that would have been courteous to a colleague, and have informed me before I left Britain what were the defects in my political views that made me an undesirable person to enter Belgium?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: It is not for me to decide, or even to suggest, that there would be any objection by the Belgian Government to the entry of the hon. Gentleman. It is in their own discretion, as it is within the discretion of every sovereign Government, to say what aliens they will admit to their territory.

Several HON. MEMBERS: rose—

Mr. SPEAKER: A very full answer has been given.

Mr. MAXTON: May I ask the Prime Minister if he approves of a colleague of his in this House being treated on the continent in a similar fashion to international crooks and dopemongers?

Mr. SPEAKER: That does not arise out of the question.

Mr. SAKLATVALA: Is it not customary, if a person is directly affected in a matter, to allow him the right of a supplementary question?

Mr. SPEAKER: If any personal matter arises, the hon. Member may ask a supplementary question.

Mr. SAKLATVALA: I was one of the victims, and I think the least the House can do is to allow me to ask a supplementary question. Is it not the case, taking it for granted that the Belgian Government had sovereign authority, that the right hon. Gentleman, in answer to the first question that though the Chinese had sovereign authority, the British Government made representations and obtained justice; is it not also the fact that in the case of Mr. Brewer, the Portuguese Government have sovereign authority and the right hon. Gentleman is fighting for him? Why cannot he do it with the Belgian Government?

Mr. SPEAKER: This is not the time either to make a speech or to have a debate.

Oral Answers to Questions — PORTUGUESE WEST AFRICA (BRITISH SEAMAN'S ARREST).

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 7.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether a reply has yet been received from the Portuguese Government to the representations made by His Majesty's Ambassador at Lisbon for a revision of Mr. A. J. Brewer's case?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The reply is in the negative.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: When may I put a question?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I cannot suggest a date. I will communicate with the hon. Member when I am in a position to reply.

Oral Answers to Questions — DEAD SEA SALTS (CONCESSION).

Colonel HOWARD-BURY: 8.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any communications have taken place between the French Government and His Majesty's Government with regard to the Dead Sea concessions; and with what result?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: Correspondence has taken place between the French Government and His Majesty's Government in regard to the claim of a French group to a concession, which the Turkish Government are alleged to have granted to certain Ottoman subjects before the War, for the extraction of certain substances from the waters of the Dead Sea. This concession was referred to in the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies to the hon. and gallant Member on 17th December; and the French Government were informed on 16th April last of the reasons for which His Majesty's Government were unable to recognise its validity. A further note from the French Ambassador on the subject was received yesterday and is now under consideration.

Mr. MACLEAN: Are we to understand that the British Government have given a concession to an alien when they will not protect a Member of this House with a passport?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: There is a dispute as to the validity of a concession which is alleged to belong to Ottoman subjects.

Mr. MACLEAN: Is it not alleged to have been given by a previous British Government?

Oral Answers to Questions — RUMANIA.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: 9.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in view of the forthcoming discussions at Geneva on minorities, he will inquire of His Majesty's Minister at Bukarest as to the number of persons imprisoned for political reasons, with or without trial, by the late Government, and the number of these recently set free by the new Government; and whether and to what extent martial law has been abolished in Bessarabia?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I will consider whether it is possible to obtain the
information for which the right hon. and gallant Gentleman asks in the first part of his question, but I do not understand what value such information will necessarily have in connection with any discussion upon minorities. As regards the second part, my information shows that the state of siege was raised throughout the whole of Rumania by royal decree on 20th November last except in the frontier zone to a depth of 10 kilometres. In that zone military jurisdiction will provisionally extend to offences against the Constitution, the safety of the State and public security. In the other parts of the country military jurisdiction has been transferred to the civil authorities. The liberty of the Press and freedom of speech have been restored and the censorship has been abolished.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: Will the right hon. Gentleman recollect that when these matters were discussed at Geneva the Government of Rumania was not a dictatorship, and that the minority are Jewish and should receive our special protection?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I candidly do not understand the right hon. and gallant Gentleman. I will try to bear in mind all relevant matters in any discussions in which I take part at Geneva.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: Is the right Gentleman aware that so long ago as 1840 Lord Palmerston issued instructions to our representatives in the Levant and Syria that they were to take the Jewish minority under their special protection?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: Lord Palmerston issued a great many instructions and took action in a good many cases in a manner which is perhaps not suited to the present condition of the world.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: If we could inoculate the right hon. Gentleman a little more with Lord Palmerston's spirit—

Mr. SPEAKER: rose—

Sir HARRY BRITTAIN: Is the Conservative party not entitled to an occasional supplementary question?

Mr. SPEAKER: We are not concerned at present with Lord Palmerston's despatches.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Is it usual for an hon. Member to remain standing when you are on your feet, even if he is a Member of the Conservative party?

Mr. SPEAKER: It ought not to be necessary for me to have to repeat that Order over and over again.

Oral Answers to Questions — VATICAN STATE.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: 10.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government will consult Washington before supporting the admission of the new Papal State to the League of Nations and satisfy themselves as to the effect of the admission upon American attitude towards co-operation with the League?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I have no reason to suppose that the Vatican State will apply for membership of the League, and it would be quite premature to state the attitude of His Majesty's Government to an event which is purely hypothetical.

Colonel WEDGWOOD: Will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that he will not commit the Government on this subject without first obtaining the views of Washington, in order that no further cause of discord may be created between the two great Powers?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not think I can pledge the British Government not to take such action as it thinks proper as a member of the League of Nations without consulting the United States Government.

Mr. MacLAREN: Has it not already been made quite clear publicly by the Vatican that the Pope is not seeking any association with the League of Nations?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I understand that is so, but I do not like to speak confidently on the subject until I have seen the full documents.

Mr. L'ESTRANGE MALONE: 12.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received information concerning the proposed treaty between His Holiness Pope Pius XI and His Majesty the King of Italy; and whether the con-
clusion of this treaty will necessitate any changes in the diplomatic relations between this country and the Vatican?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: His Majesty's Government, as yet, have no official information as to the treaty's contents, which have not yet been published. I am therefore unable to give any answer to the second part of the question.

Oral Answers to Questions — YUGOSLAVIA (MINORITIES).

Mr. MALONE: 13.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has received a report from His Majesty's representative at Belgrade on the degree to which the Government of Yugoslavia is respecting, in the treatment of the national minorities within its frontiers, its obligations, which were undertaken under the terms of the Treaty of Sevres?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: I am uncertain as to the Treaty to which the hon. Member refers. As he is no doubt aware, the main treaty with Turkey signed at Sevres on 10th August, 1920, never came into force. The subsidiary minorities Treaty signed at Sevres on the same day, which was subsequently annexed to the Treaty of Lausanne, was binding upon Greece and not Yugoslavia, while another treaty signed at Sevres on 10th August, 1920, related to Thrace and made no provision for the treatment of minorities in Yugoslavia.

Oral Answers to Questions — FOREIGN AFFAIRS (DOMINIONS).

Mr. PONSONBY: 15.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what arrangements are now in operation with each of the Dominions for keeping the Dominions Governments informed with regard to foreign affairs; what officers have been appointed for this purpose either by His Majesty's Government or the Dominions Governments; and whether any further developments in a scheme of Empire co-ordination in respect of foreign policy is in contemplation?

The SECRETARY of STATE for DOMINION AFFAIRS (Mr. Amery): I have been asked to reply. Apart from the information which certain of His Majesty's Governments in the Dominions derive from individual Dominion representatives appointed at foreign capitals,
all His Majesty's Governments in the Dominions are kept fully supplied with all important information on foreign affairs at the disposal of His Majesty's Government in the United Kingdom. This information is conveyed to them through the usual official channels. In addition, His Majesty's Government in the Commonwealth of Australia have appointed a liaison officer in London who is in close touch with the Foreign Office; and the services of the High Commissioner for the United Kingdom in Canada, the Imperial Secretary in South Africa, and the Foreign Office official seconded for work in the Prime Minister's Department in New Zealand are available for the supply of information and for the purpose of facilitating consultation and discussion. With regard to the last part of the question, the present policy, which was laid down by the Imperial Conference of 1926, is fully set out in the Report of the Inter-Imperial Relations Committee of that Conference; and I think I may add that constant study is given by all His Majesty's Governments to the question of the methods by which that policy can best be carried out.

Sir WILFRID SUGDEN: Do we understand that if the Canadian Ambassador at Washington desires to negotiate a commercial treaty, our Foreign Office, and the right hon. Gentleman's Department as well, are consulted before a treaty between Canada and the United States on commercial business is ratified?

Mr. AMERY: I think the general position under the agreement arrived at in 1926 is that, while we deal with affairs which concern ourselves, we do not take action which may affect other members of the Commonwealth without consulting them.

Oral Answers to Questions — AFGHANISTAN (EVACUATIONS, KABUL).

Mr. DAY: 16.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the total number of persons who have been evacuated by Royal Air Force aeroplanes from Kabul; and whether he can give the nationality of these persons?

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: The following men, women and children were
evacuated from Kabul by the Royal Air Force between 23rd December, 1928, and 11th February, 1929:


British subjects
…
216


Afghans
…
32


French
…
11


Germans
…
34


Italians
…
4


Persians
…
19


Roumanians
…
1


Swiss
…
1


Syrians
…
5


Turks
…
42


United States citizens
…
1


Making a total of 366, of whom some 280 were women and children.

Oral Answers to Questions — ROYAL NAVY.

CHILEAN BATTLESHIP "ALMIRANTE LATORRE" (REFIT).

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 17.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he has now received a report from the Devonport dockyard officials who recently went to Valparaiso to inspect the Chilean battleship "Almirante Latorre" with a view to the Admiralty tendering for its refit; and what decision has been reached?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Lieut.-Colonel Headlam): A full report has not yet been received. The second part of the question, therefore, does not arise.

HIS MAJESTY'S SHIP "HOOD" (CREW).

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 18.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, when His Majesty's Ship "Hood" re-commissions after her prospective refit, it is intended to man her with a Portsmouth crew; and whether he is aware that this prospect is causing great anxiety in Devonport, seeing that, besides being a sentimental loss, it will mean a material loss to the traders in the town?

The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Bridgeman): The port from which H.M.S. "Hood" will be manned after her prospective refit has not yet been decided, but it will probably be Portsmouth. This change, if made, will be part of corresponding changes in the manning of capital ships, which will leave the existing balance of manning between the two ports practically unchanged.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind the con siderations mentioned in the question when he comes to take his decision?

NEW CONSTRUCTION.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 19.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether it is proposed to lay down new vessels in next year's programme early in the year or late, in view of the late ordering and laying down of cruisers, etc., in this year's programme and in view of other considerations?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: Proposals with regard to the approximate time of ordering the ships of next year's programme will be submitted to the House with the Navy Estimates for 1929.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Are these considerations being borne in mind, and also the fact that, if they are laid down late, less money may be wasted in the case of a naval agreement of 1931?

Mr. SANDEMAN: Is it not the fact, that, if anyone upsets an arrangement made, it will cost the country very much more than to go on with the programme already arranged?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: I believe the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) is referring to a future programme about which he knows nothing, and not to the programme already arranged.

Oral Answers to Questions — KING'S ROLL (LONDON NEWSPAPERS).

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: 24.
asked the Minister of Labour whether all leading London daily newspapers are now on the King's Roll?

The MINISTER of LABOUR (Sir Arthur Steel-Maitiand): I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT a list of the London daily newspapers which are on the King's Roll.

Following is the list:

Daily Chronicle.
Daily Express.
Daily Herald.
Daily Mail.
Daily Mirror.
Daily News and Westminster Gazette.
Daily Sketch.
392
Daily Telegraph.
Financial Times.
Morning Advertiser.
Morning Post.
Times.

Oral Answers to Questions — UNEMPLOYMENT.

GLASGOW.

Mr. HARDIE: 25.
asked the Minister of Labour whether in the new buildings for Springburn Employment Exchange provision has been made for lean-to shelters over entrances?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The new premises will contain more waiting space and better facilities for dealing with applicants and there should be no necessity for applicants to wait outside the premises. It is not considered either necessary or desirable to provide lean-to shelters outside the new building.

Mr. HARDIE: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that, owing to the fact that many of these men have to travel long distances, it is not possible to house them when they arrive, and will he not consider giving a lean-to shelter which would provide accommodation for a wet day?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: There is a choice between two alternatives; giving reasonable accommodation for people who arrive or similar accommodation with a lean-to shelter outside. We have chosen the first course, and we hope to be able to give accommodation within the building, with some latitude for people arriving from outside. Lean-to shelters are inadvisable, because other people loiter about them. It is far better to do as we are trying to do.

Mr. HARDIE: Is it not the fact that, taking the plan as now drawn and worked upon, you have only a slight increase in floor space inside for working, with no increase in floor space as far as applicants are concerned?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I am advised that there should be reasonable accommodation under the roof for people coming in.

Mr. HARDIE: I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter again.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: 26.
asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the unemployed in Clydebank have to travel to Glasgow to go before the court of referees; if so, whether he will allow Clydebank a court of referees of its own; and, if not, whether his Department will pay the expenses of the Clydebank unemployed in travelling to and from Clydebank?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: There are insufficient cases arising from the area of the Clydebank Exchange to justify the holding of courts at that Exchange. Claimants summoned to the Glasgow court from Clydebank can claim expenses in accordance with the authorised scale.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Then it follows that any constituent of mine who has to travel eight miles to Glasgow to the court of referees will be paid travelling expenses?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: They are paid their travelling expenses on an authorised scale, and the summons to the court of referees, which they will be able to see, gives notice in regard to it.

Mr. BUCHANAN: 34.
asked the Minister of Labour the total number of persons who have appeared at the court of referees in Glasgow, and whose claims have been refused, since the new Act has operated; and the number of persons not in any organisation who have been granted the right of appeal to the umpire, and the number refused this right?

Sir A. STEEL-MA1TLAND: Between 19th April, 1928, and 14th January, 1929, 36,954 cases were considered by courts of referees in Glasgow. The courts recommended disallowance of benefit in 5,602 of these cases. As regards the second part of the question, I regret that statistics giving the information desired are not available for the whole of the period since 19th April, 1928. As I promised the hon. Member on 5th December, a record was specially kept for the period of four weeks ending 12th January, 1929, and shows that out of a total of 660 cases in which the courts of referees in Glasgow recommended disallowance of claims made by persons not known to belong to a trade union, leave to appeal to the umpire was given in four cases.

Mr. BUCHANAN: 35.
asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that the court of referees hearings for men are held in Brown Street Exchange, Glasgow, on the sixth flat, to which no hoist is available; that a number of persons claiming benefit are well up in years and others have difficulty in being able to climb the stairs; that the applicants have in some cases to wait for over one hour; that the place where they wait has no door, and that it is not provided with any heat; and if he will take steps to have better arrangements made for the hearing of cases?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The premises at Brown Street are occupied temporarily pending the completion of the new building. The court of referees is held on the fourth (not the sixth) floor of the building, and as the staircase has an easy gradient I do not think there is any cause for complaint in this respect. I am not aware that appellants have to wait an hour. If that has happened it must be quite unusual and probably the result of attending before the time appointed. I am endeavouring, however, to arrange for a waiting room with a fire.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that there are far better places in the City of Glasgow for the court of referees than this one, and will he ask his staff to make inquiries and see if another place can be found?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I will gladly see if there is anything else which is better, and if the hon. Member knows of any place perhaps he will suggest it.

BENEFIT.

Mr. BROAD: 28.
asked the Minister of Labour whether he has inquired into the cases of two fitters who were required by the manager of the Derby Employment Exchange to provide medical certificates as to the likelihood of their being able to pass the examination by the medical officer at the Ordnance Depot at Aldershot, where it was proposed to send them with a view to employment whether he is aware that the local doctors required 2s. 6d. and 3s. 6d. from these men, respectively, for such certificates; that having been out of work for some time they were not able to pay these fees, and so did not secure the certificates; and that thereupon their benefit
was denied to them; and under what Clause in the Act his officers at Derby have taken this action?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The failure of these men to obtain medical certificates was reported to the Insurance officer, who disallowed benefit. I understand the matter is being made the subject of appeal to the Court of Referees.

Mr. BROAD: Does not the right hon. Gentleman recognise his responsibility to this House for the action of his Department, and can be say under what authority this step was taken?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The step was taken by the Insurance officer, and, while I do not set up to be a judge of the circumstance's so as to influence the decision, it seems to me to be perfectly reasonable. There were six men who, together with others, were applicants for certain posts that were offered at Aldershot. One condition of the application was that they should possess a medical certificate. To save them a possible journey for nothing, it was arranged that they should be examined by their own doctor in Derby. Before the question of appointment came up, four of the six applicants from Derby had obtained local employment through their own trade union secretary. The other two who were still on the applicant list had not obtained medical certificates. Therefore, for the moment, their benefit was suspended, and it is now subject to the decision of the Court of Referees.

Mr. BROAD: Can the right hon. Gentleman—

Mr. SPEAKER: Mr. Kirkwood.

Mr. BROAD: I want to put another supplementary question.

Mr. SPEAKER: We are getting on very with questions.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: 37.
asked the Minister of Labour whether he has received a resolution from a meeting of representatives of the county boroughs and boroughs of Burton-upon-Trent, Derby, Ilkeston, Leicester, and Mansfield, and the Leicester Board of Guardians and other local authorities, calling upon him to waive the clause, Not genuinely
seeking work, in districts where unemployment is excessive, in view of the fact that disqualifications under this clause are throwing additional burdens upon the local board of guardians; and whether he proposes to take any action in the matter?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given last Thursday to the hon. Member for the North-Eastern Division of Derbyshire (Mr. Lee), of which I am sending him a copy.

Mr. PALING: In one of his replies, will the Minister of Labour give us a statement saying what "genuinely seeking work" means?

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: 42.
asked the Minister of Labour why unemployed persons whose benefits have ceased owing to the operation of the 30-stamp qualification are receiving a special buff form on which Ineffective is written in red ink; and will he state whether such, forms are being issued by all Employment Exchanges?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The instructions do not provide for such an entry on any form issued to claimants for benefit, and I should be obliged if the hon. Member would let me have further particulars.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that all men who have been disqualified from benefit on account of the 30-stamp qualification are receiving these forms, and will he ascertain why?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I am making the inquiries which are asked for. If the hon. Member knows of any particular case, perhaps he will give me the particulars.

Mr. BUCHANAN.: Is the Minister of Labour aware that a form has been issued to unemployed persons in which no reference is made to the 30-stamp qualification being waived, and will lie see that this form is substituted by one giving unemployed persons all the details?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: That does not arise out of the question. Perhaps the hon. Member will put a question down.

IRON FOUNDRY LABOURERS, KIRKINTILLOCK.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: 29.
asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware that the iron foundry labourers at Kirkintillock have been for the last three weeks awaiting payment of unemployment benefit; and if he will say what is the cause of the delay?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The claims of the foundry labourers at Kirkintillock were originally disallowed on the ground that they lost employment by reason of a stoppage of work due to a trade dispute. Subsequently, on further information being furnished to the Chief Insurance Officer, he revised his decision and the labourers' claims have now been allowed. Payment of benefit will be made to-day.

BETHNAL GREEN.

Mr. HARRIS: 32.
asked the Minister of Labour bow the percentage of unemployment is arrived at for the borough of Poplar; and whether it will be possible to apply the same method of arriving at the figures for the borough of Bethnal Green, so that advantage may be taken of the facilities provided by the Unemployment Grants Committee?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The percentage of unemployment in Poplar or any other London borough can only be given on an estimated basis. An estimate of the number unemployed in Bethnal Green was given in the reply to the hon. Member for the North East Division of Bethnal Green (Mr. Windsor) on 7th February; the number then given probably represents a rate of unemployment of 7.7 per cent. at 28th January last.

Mr. HARRIS: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that percentage was arrived at by lumping Hackney, Shoreditch and Stepney with Bethnal Green and the percentage in other boroughs being very much lower, Bethnal Green is deprived of the advantage of the Unemployment Grants Committee's facilities, which go to other areas which are classified as depressed?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I am not sure how far that is the case, but I will look into it again and communicate with the hon. Member, or perhaps he will communicate with me.

LOCAL AUTHORITIES' SCHEMES.

Mr. BUCHANAN: 33.
asked the Minister of Labour the total number of persons now being given employment from mining areas under the new scheme for providing employment with the local authorities; and what proportion of the £671,838, which is to be spent on these schemes, will go in wages?

Sir A. STEEL-MA1TLAND: The number of transferred men employed on the 26th January, the date of the last return, was 42. Of the sum of £671,838 it is estimated that approximately one-half will be spent on payment of wages to men directly employed.

STATISTICS.

Commander OLIVER LOCKERLAMPSON: 36.
asked the Minister of Labour the amount of money spent under all heads upon unemployment during each year since 1919; and the average number of persons unemployed under all heads for the same years?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I am having a statement prepared giving such information as is readily available, and will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. BROAD: 38.
asked the Minister of Labour the total number of applicants for unemployment benefit during last year of men, women, boys, and girls, respectively; how many in each class were referred to the chief insurance officer; how many claims were allowed by him; how many of those refused were taken to the court of referees; and how many in each class had their benefit withheld on the ground that they were not genuinely seeking employment?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: It has not been possible in the time available to tabulate this information, but I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT as soon as it is ready.

ENFIELD AND TOTTENHAM.

Mr. BROAD: 39.
asked the Minister of Labour the totals of insured men on the books of the Enfield and Tottenham Employment Exchanges on 1st January of this year or the nearest available date; what were the totals of men registered as unemployed at those Exchanges at the same date; and are the managers at these Exchanges still under instructions to
endeavour to secure employment for men from other areas whilst local unemployed workers are available?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The nearest date to 31st December for which the figures asked for are available is 17th December. At that date there were 3,862 men aged 18 and over on the registers of the Enfield and Tottenham Employment Exchanges, including 3,635 men insured under the Unemployment Insurance Acts. That is between 7 and 8 per cent. In reply to the last part, all Exchanges attempt to place as many local men as possible in employment, but I should not feel justified in excluding these areas from the transference scheme, although the number of men it is possible to bring in is not large.

Mr. BROAD: May I ask what percentages of unemployed unskilled workmen are included in these totals?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: It all depends on the nature of the district and whether the employment is temporary or continuing. I cannot give a cut-and-dried answer in a case like that.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Does the right hon. Gentleman mean that he is transferring men into districts which are already carrying more people than they are able to employ?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: If anyone studies the actual facts of the case, it will be found that it does not follow that all the people, if there are more out of work in any district, are suitable for the particular kind of work for which the transferee may be brought in. I have to consider all these things, and I always take into account the degree of unemployment in a district.

EMPLOYMENT EXCHANGES (CARETAKERS' APARTMENTS).

Mr. R. MORRISON: 41.
asked the Minister of Labour whether his Department is responsible for the apartments occupied by caretakers of Employment Exchanges being kept fit for habitation?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I understand that the hon. Member has communicated details to my Department. I am taking the matter up with my Noble Friend, the First Commissioner of Works.

LONDON.

Mr. MACLEAN: 43.
asked the Minister of Labour the number of people in London insured under the Unemployment Insurance Acts in the years 1924, 1925, 1926, 1927, and 1928, respectively; and the number of unemployed people registering at the Employment Exchanges in the same years?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: With the hon. Member's permission I will circulate a statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the statement:

The following statement shows the estimated number of insured persons in the Greater London area at July of each year from 1924–1928 and the average numbers on the registers of Employment Exchanges at or near the end of the month. Persons aged 65 and over ceased to be insured as from 2nd January, 1928. For purpose of comparison the estimated numbers of persons aged 16–64, included in the figures for 1924 to 1927, have been stated in Column 3.

Year.
Estimated numbers insured aged 16 and over.
Estimated numbers insured aged 16–64.
Average numbers on the registers.


1.
2.
3.
4.


1924
…
2,011,000
1,956,000
171,620


1925
…
2,082,000
2,025,000
148,656


1926
…
2,110,000
2,052,000
132,566


1927
…
2,150,100
2,091,000
113,396


1928
…
—
2,147,530
110,015

Oral Answers to Questions — ASIATIC LABOUR CONFERENCE.

Mr. WELLOCK: 44.
asked the Minister of Labour if he can give information regarding the Asiatic Labour Conference now being arranged by the International Labour Office; when and where it will meet; and what questions it will consider?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I learn from "Industrial and Labour Information," published by the International Labour Office, that the Asiatic Labour Conference is an unofficial body consisting of labour representatives from China, India, Japan and other Eastern countries. It is stated that the first meeting will take place probably in India some five or six weeks before the International Labour Conference, and that the agenda
will include any items on the agenda of the International Labour Conference that present aspects of common interest to the countries represented.

Oral Answers to Questions — COAL INDUSTRY.

MINERS' RELIEF FUND (TAXATION OF ROYALTIES).

Sir R. THOMAS: 45.
asked the Prime Minister whether he will consider instituting a special tax on mineral royalties, the proceeds to be devoted to the miners' relief fund?

The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Baldwin): No, Sir; the Government do not propose to adopt the suggestion of the hon. Member.

Sir R. THOMAS: Will the right hon. Gentleman give the House his reasons for giving a negative reply?

The PRIME MINISTER: I think it would be a very interesting subject for debate, but at the moment I do not think any further tax is required. In the second place, the particular subject which the hon. Member proposes to tax has already a double tax upon it, and there are other things which I think might be considered.

Mr. ERSKINE: Is not this the real answer to the question: that it is grossly unfair to penalise any one section of the community?

Mr. MARDY JONES: What services to the country do the landlords render for these royalties?

NINE MILE POINT COLLIERY (DISPUTE).

Captain FANSHAWE: 54.
asked the Attorney-General if his attention has been drawn to the fact that the employers at the Nine Mile Point Colliery, owned by the Ocean Coal Company, offered terms to their employés, on or about 3rd November, 1928, which were adjudged by the Umpire, decision 5,672/1928, to entail a breach of the Coal Mines Act, 1908, as amended by the Coal Mines Acts of 1919 and 1926, and that these terms were not withdrawn until 25th January, 1929; and what steps he proposes to take?

The SECRETARY for MINES (Commodore Douglas King): I have been asked to reply. For details of the case I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend
to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour on the 6th February. As the terms of employment to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers were rejected by the men, no question of a breach of the Act arises.

Captain FANSHAWE: Will my hon. and gallant Friend say whether his Department keeps closely in touch with the Umpire, so that if the Umpire gives any important decisions of this nature with regard to his Department immediate investigation is made to see whether, if an offer is accepted, a breach of the law actually takes place?

Commodore KING: The Umpire is in close touch with the Ministry of Labour, and I am always in touch with my right hon. Friend's Department on all questions affecting the mining industry.

Mr. RAMSAY MacDONALD: May I ask that this point should be made perfectly clear? Supposing the employers make proposals to the men which are illegal, is the Department to take no interest in the industrial action that may follow those proposals?

Commodore KING: No, Sir. My duties as Secretary for Mines are laid down in the Coal Mines Act and other Acts. The duty is there laid upon the Secretary for Mines of administering the Act. If there is no breach of the Act, there is no necessity for the Secretary for Mines to interfere.

Mr. BARKER: Is it not a breach of the law to attempt to coerce men to violate the provisions of the Coal Mines Regulation Act; and, if it is a breach of the Act, will the hon. and gallant Gentleman prosecute these owners?

Commodore KING: No, Sir, it is not a breach of the Act. It may be illegal in other ways—I do not know—but it certainly is not a breach of the Coal Mines Act.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Is the hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that the terms offered by the mineowners in 1926 were a breach of the Act of Parliament, and that the Government endorsed that by passing the Eight Hours Act?

Mr. MARDY JONES: Will the Government assist in giving the same publicity to breaches of the law by the coal-owners as they do in other cases?

Oral Answers to Questions — FISHING INDUSTRY.

SURPLUS HERRING CATCHES.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 46.
asked the Prime Minister whether he has received a telegram from Buckie informing him that on the 6th and 7th of January last, the herring drifters, with nearly 1,000 crans of herring, were ordered to proceed out of harbour again and dump their cargoes of 1,000,000 herring into the sea, owing to a ban placed on further landings by an exporters and fish curers' committee, because the Continental markets have been fully supplied; and whether he can propose any emergency measures to prevent further such waste of food, in view of the prevailing distress in many parts of the country, and especially in the raining districts?

Mr. W. THORNE: 71.
asked the Minister of Agriculture if he is aware that a fish haul totalling 200 tons of herring was caught off the coast of Buckie, Banffshire, during the week-end, the major portion of which was thrown back into the sea; that only one boatload out of seven was transported by the local farmers for use as manure; and whether his Department has any machinery which could deal with the distribution of catches of fish when in excess of the normal supply?

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour): My right hon. Friend received a telegram from Buckie on 8th February in which it was stated that nearly 1,000 crans of herrings would have to be returned to the sea owing to lack of purchasers. I understand that these herrings, which had been caught on the north-west coast and were apparently of indifferent quality, were unsuccessfully offered for sale at Wick on 7th February and at Buckie on 8th February. The curers would not buy them for curing in view of stocks on hand and restricted demand.
My Department has no machinery for dealing with the distribution of surplus catches of fish. As regards the suggestion made by the hon. and gallant Member with respect to the use of such fish in the mining districts, I am communicating the suggestion to the Scottish Central Advisory Committee for their consideration.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: I am sorry, but January in the question should have been February. I have no doubt that the Secretary of State for Scotland understands that. May I ask if he will also communicate with the English Distress Committee under the President of the Board of Education with a view to seeing whether further gluts of fish might be bought and distributed in the distressed areas.

Sir J. GILMOUR: I will draw my right hon. Friend's attention to that suggestion.

Mr. BOOTHBY: Arising out of the answer, may I ask whether it is not a fact that there is good reason to suppose that the ban referred to has been imposed on the herring fishing industry by a small group of curers for purposes of their own, for the purpose of filling their own pockets, and, if that is the case, will the right hon. Gentleman have an inquiry made into the whole position?

Sir BERTRAM FALLE: May I ask whether this is not an unusual season for the herring to come to Buckie; and cannot my right hon. Friend suggest a remedy by which the fish caught may be preserved for sale in this country instead of sending them to the foreigner to be sold at three for 1d.?

Sir J. GILMOUR: Investigation is constantly being made as to the possibility of adopting fresh curing methods in order to distribute them for sale. With regard to the question of the hon. Member for East Aberdeen (Mr. Boothby), if he can give me any evidence whatever to support what he has said, I will certainly look into the matter.

Mr. W. THORNE: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that wagon loads of this fish are sold to farmers for manure Can he state what was the price paid?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I could not answer without notice. Probably some of the herring are eventually used as manure.

Sir W. SUGDEN: Is not the difficulty due to the fact that the Germans are permitted to dump their fish into our ports, while our own fishermen are not permitted to take their fish into foreign ports because of a prohibitive embargo?

Mr. PALING: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in answer to a question in this House yesterday it was stated that there had been an alarming decrease in the number of people engaged in the fishing industry, and is that to be wondered at in face of such facts as those stated?

CREDIT FACILITIES.

Sir ROBERT HAMILTON: 48.
asked the Prime Minister whether there has been an inquiry into the question of extending credit facilities to the fishing industry; if any report of such inquiry is available; and what action the Government proposes to take in the matter?

The MINISTER of AGRICULTURE (Mr. Guinness): I have been asked to reply. The Fishery Departments in Great Britain are continually in touch with the industry in all its branches. I am satisfied that the fishing industry does not lack credit facilities, and that such facilities cannot usefully be placed at its disposal by the Government. The Government is always ready to consider any practical suggestions for meeting specific needs of this important industry.

Sir R. HAMILTON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that such an inquiry as is indicated in the question was definitely promised by the Prime Minister in his election address tin 1924?

Mr. GUINNESS: We have carefully examined the matter. I remember that the hon. and gallant Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy) was going to bring to me a deputation on the subject, and the Hull Trawlers' Association passed a resolution that credits were neither needed nor desirable, and the matter then dropped. I think that, in view of the evidence we have had, it would be ill-timed to bring forward such a scheme.

Commander WILLIAMS: Is there not a considerable difference between the steam trawlers and the smaller fishing boats, and is there not a demand for credit in many places that have the smaller type of fishing boat? Will my right hon. Friend particularly look into the matter, having regard to those districts with the smaller boats?

Mr. GUINNESS: We are always willing to listen to any representations, but
I would remind hon. Members that when there was a scheme in force for the provision of credits in Scotland and for the provision of nets very small demand was made on it.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: As Hull has been mentioned, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he is aware that the Hull Trawlers' Association speaks only for certain companies, and not for the men employed in the industry; and is he aware that the whole fishing industry is not concentrated in Hull in any case.

Mr. WOMERSLEY: Is my right hon. Friend aware that the two credit schemes that have been instituted, one by the Coalition Government and the other by the Labour Government, were dismal failures?

Sir R. HAMILTON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the failure of the scheme to which he referred was owing to the harsh terms imposed by the Treasury; and may I ask further whether there has been any report of such an inquiry as was promised by the Prime Minister?

Mr. GUINNESS: I think it might well be that people would be glad to have free grants, hut the question is one about credits. Credits on any self-supporting principle do not meet with any considerable demand.

Sir R. HAMILTON: May I have a reply to the central part of my question?

Mr. SPEAKER: We cannot spend five minutes on every question.

BOMBING PRACTICE, BRIDLINGTON.

Major BRAITHWAITE: 52.
asked the Secretary of State for Air if his attention has been drawn to the possibility of considerable damage to the fishing interests of the Bridlington fishermen by the dropping of live bombs from aircraft in Bridlington Bay; and will he make full inquiries with a view to safeguarding the rights of, the fishermen?

The SECRETARY of STATE for AIR (Sir Samuel Hoare): The answer to both parts of the question is in the affirmative. Representations from the local authorities and a petition from the fishermen have been received and a deputation on the subject from the Brid-
lington Town Council is shortly to be received by the Air Ministry. My hon. and gallant Friend may rest assured that no decision will be reached without the very fullest inquiry and consideration.

Oral Answers to Questions — AUSTRALIA (ECONOMIC COMMISSION).

Major-General Sir NEWTON MOORE: 47.
asked the Prime Minister whether the Government has received a copy of the Report by the British Economic Commission, comprising Sir Arthur Duckham, Sir Hugo Hirst, Sir Ernest Clark, and Mr. Dougal Malcolm, to the Commonwealth of Australia, dealing with Australia's economic position and the different phases of Australian finance; and, if so, whether such Report will be issued as a White Paper for the information of the Members of the House?

Mr. AMERY: I have been asked to reply. I have received advanced copies of the Report submitted by the Mission to the Prime Minister of the Commonwealth of Australia, but not, as yet, a copy of the Report in the form in which it was published in Australia. The question of publication here is under consideration.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRADE FACILITIES ACT.

Lord HENRY CAVENDISH-BENTINCK: 49.
asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that many reforms in the organisation of industry, and particularly in the mining industry, such as amalgamations and the modernisation of machinery and plant, cannot be undertaken owing to the lack of the necessary capital, he will revive the Trade Facilities Act?

The PRIME MINISTER: No, Sir. I should not feel justified in proposing such a departure, unless I was fully satisfied that the necessary credits cannot be obtained in the ordinary course of business.

Oral Answers to Questions — AVIATION.

AIR SERVICES (AFRICA).

Viscount SANDON: 50.
asked the Secretary of State for Air what steps are being taken to avoid the imminent
monopoly of air transport and development throughout Africa by France and Belgium; and whether any British exploitation is to be anticipated immediately?

Sir S. HOARE: I am aware that proposals are on foot for the establishment of new French and Belgian air services in West Africa, but I do not think there is any likelihood of their adoption resulting in the monopoly which my Noble Friend fears. Imperial Airways should be operating a service between London and Alexandria by about the 1st April, and I hope that this air service may be supplemented before long by another between Egypt and the Cape, proposals for which I am already considering.

SCHNEIDER CUP RACE.

Mr. DAY: 51.
asked the Secretary of State for Air whether he cm now make a statement as to the names of the British competitors who will take part in the Schneider cup race; the names of the machines which will take part; and with what engines they will be fitted?

Sir S. HOARE: No, Sir. No definite selection is likely to be made for some time, and I cannot add anything to the reply which I gave the hon. Member on 6th February.

Mr. DAY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the announcement will be made?

Sir S. HOARE: No, Sir. In any case, I am not sure whether we should announce the names. We regard this work as ordinary service work, and it is not usual to announce the names.

Oral Answers to Questions — JUSTICES OF THE PEACE (ADVISORY COMMITTEES).

Mr. OLIVER: 53.
asked the Attorney-General whether, with regard to the composition of the advisory committees appointed for the nomination of suitable persons to serve as justices of the peace, any efforts are being made to make these bodies more representative of the public life of the areas in which they serve?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL (Sir Thomas Inskip): The Lord Chancellor is re-constituting all advisory committees for the appointment of justices of the peace, and is re-appointing them for
fixed terms of office. Provision is made for the automatic retirement of half the members of the committees every three years. My Noble Friend endeavours to appoint members who are representative of all sections of public life in the community when be is re-constituting the committees, and when he is considering the question of re-appointing retiring members. He has every reason to believe that his committees are representative.

Mr. OLIVER: When is it expected that these reconstituted committees will come into existence?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: That depends on the time at which each committee comes up for reconstitution.

Mr. R. MORRISON: With reference to the statement that a certain number of members of the advisory committee retire automatically every three years, would the learned Attorney-General say whether those members are subject to re-election or whether they retire permanently?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: My Noble Friend will have the same powers when the committees are re-constituted at the end of the three years as he has at the beginning—unless, of course, his powers are altered.

Oral Answers to Questions — ASPIRIN (SALES).

Sir R. THOMAS: 55.
asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that there is a movement to instal automatic machines for the sale of aspirin; and whether his advisers are of opinion that such uncontrolled sale of this drug is in the public interest?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): I understand that this question has been referred to the Inter-Departmental Committee on the Poisons and Pharmacy Acts, and my right hon. Friend must await their Report before expressing any opinion upon it.

Sir R. THOMAS: Can the right hon. Gentleman give the date on which the report is likely to be received?

Sir K. WOOD: No, Sir. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put down a question, and I will speak to the Home Secretary on the matter.

Sir W. SUGDEN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that aspirin is being widely advertised and sold as "Aspro," without a label, in small pennyworths, in little shops throughout the country?

Oral Answers to Questions — LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND RATING.

VOLUNTARY HOSPITALS.

Sir NICHOLAS GRATTANDOYLE: 56.
asked the Minister of Health whether his attention has been called to the increased assessments under the Rating and Valuation Act, 1925, on provincial voluntary hospitals; and whether, in view of the public service rendered by these institutions and of their financial position, he will consider either de-rating them or giving them preferential terms of assessment?

Sir K. WOOD: As my right hon. Friend has previously explained, the exemption of hospitals from rating could not be effected without legislation and he does not consider that such a proposal can be considered apart from the similar claims made on behalf of other charitable and public institutions. The same considerations apply to preferential terms of assessment. The Central Valuation Committee have made certain recommendations with respect to the assessment of hospitals and charitable institutions and where these have been adopted there should be no undue hardship.

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the desirability of introducing legislation to cover all those points which he has mentioned?

Sir K. WOOD: I am sure we all desire to do what we can for the voluntary hospitals, but the hon. Gentleman will, no doubt, realise that, if one began to give preferential treatment in this way to voluntary hospitals, one would be immediately confronted with claims on behalf of blind institutions and other institutions. This raises a very big and important question which it is hardly possible to deal with by way of question and answer.

Mr. HARRIS: Is it not a fact that an Amendment was moved by me giving relief to voluntary hospitals and that it was voted down by the whole Conservative party?

Sir K. WOOD: Yes, but in that Amendment the hon. Gentleman included licensed premises, which, perhaps, alters the circumstances.

Mr. TAYLOR: What is the total additional burden thrown on the voluntary hospitals by reason of the increased assessment?

Sir K. WOOD: I must have notice of that question. I doubt very much if I can get the information, but perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put the question down.

Mr. HARRIS: On a point of Order. Is the right hon. Gentleman, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health, justified in making a statement for which there is no warrant in fact but which is definitely contrary to the facts?

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Is it in order for the hon. Member to accuse a Minister of having made a statement which is false, the Minister knowing it to be false?

Mr. SPEAKER: A great many of these points of order are rather unnecessary.

Mr. HARRIS: I ask your protection, Sir. Is the Minister entitled to take advantage of his position to mislead the House by making a misstatement concerning an Amendment moved by me, which only dealt with voluntary hospitals, and which was moved on behalf of the voluntary hospitals, as the right hon. Gentleman himself knows?

Sir K. WOOD: I have no wish to misrepresent the hon. Member. If he says that is the fact, then I accept it. But I also remember very well indeed that he moved an Amendment with reference to licensed premises.

WEST HAM.

Mr. W. THORNE: 57.
asked the Minister of Health whether it is his intention to consult with the borough treasurer of West Ham before he decides the rearrangement of the financial position of the borough and the Poor Law union area under the Local Government Bill?

Sir K. WOOD: The Corporation will be consulted before the financial details
of the arrangements to be made as regards the West Ham Union and the county borough are settled.

Mr. THORNE: Will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to facilitate the consultations and get a decision as quickly as possible, so that West Ham may get outside the brutal treatment exercised by the Poor Law commissioners?

Sir K. WOOD: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will refer to the Debate of last evening in which he will see that my right hon. Friend the Minister gave certain explanations as regards conditions in West Ham and East Ham, and also indicated the steps which he proposed to take regarding consultation with the authorities themselves.

Mr. THORNE: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I heard the Debate, and that some of his statements were very misleading?

Oral Answers to Questions — HOUSING ACT (1925) AMENDMENT BILL.

"to amend certain provisions in Part II of the Housing Act, 1925, relating to improvement and reconstruction schemes," presented by Mr. Wells; supported by Mr. Savery, Mr. Ramsden, Mr. Burman, Major McLean, Sir John Power and Mr. Somerville; to be read a Second time upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 53.]

NEWSPAPER COMPETITIONS.

Major BRAITHWAITE: I beg to move,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the law to permit competitions to be carried on in the newspapers for forecasting the results of football matches.
The Bill which I ask leave to introduce refers, in particular, to those competitions which were arranged in connection with the forecasting of the results of football matches. As the House is aware, under a recent decision in the Law Courts persons purchasing a newspaper and filling in the competition form arranged for forecasting the results of football matches, have been deemed to be committing an offence under the Ready Money Football Betting Act of 1920, although the same persons may fill in a
cross-word puzzle or a picture guessing competition form under exactly the same conditions and still be within the law. I feel that league football, as the sport of the ordinary workman of this country, should not have been singled out in this way.
In spite of recent disclosures in the Press, league football under the Football Association is conducted in the best regulated and fairest way of any of our national sports, and in these days of industrial depression league football has been, in my opinion, one of the great safety valves of this nation. Millions of people have had a great deal of pleasure and amusement by entering these competitions. They understand the competitions and they follow the clubs concerned, and there is created a friendly rivalry between the various towns and cities of our country. I think it is unfair that all these people should be deprived of something which has given them so much pleasure. I have had thousands of letters from different parts of the country complaining of this decision, and I ask the House to give an opportunity for amending the law and bringing these competitions into line with the others which are now allowed to run in the newspapers.
The provisions of this Bill are that the competitions are made legal, and that no entrance fee can be taken by the newspapers; and in order to safeguard the newspapers from the possibility of fictitious circulation, which has an effect on the advertising value of the newspaper, I should like to make it illegal for one person to send in more than one entry for the current day's issue of such paper. I should also like to provide in this Bill that the purchase of the newspaper does not commit the offence of gambling. If I thought the filling in of a football coupon in a newspaper constituted a form of gambling, I should not be here asking the House to accept a Bill of this kind. I should also like to provide in the Bill that the holding of such competitions in a newspaper does not render that newspaper liable to damages under the decision which was arrived at some time ago in the Law Courts. On those grounds, I ask the House earnestly to consider the views and wishes of many millions of people who have had pleasure in this work, and
to give an opportunity for amending the law in this direction.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: rose—

Mr. SPEAKER: Does the hon. Member rise to oppose the Bill?

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: Yes, Sir. I wish to oppose the introduction of this Bill, as I reckon that the proposal is on the same plane as other proposals of a similar character which endeavour to open up this broad way of working upon games of chance and to exploit this opinion which is too readily fastened upon by the cuteness of newspapers in this country, which we know are mostly engaged in anything but an endeavour to uplift the people and advance their best interests. The proposal is one which the law has already met, in so far that very important Press agencies in the country have been decided against in this matter; and while, of course, there is a popularity associated with such schemes, we know that that popularity is not of that value which ought to be really appreciated by all who are concerned about the real progress of the people at large. There is not, as one hon. Member here has suggested, any actual sport in it. It is a matter of coming in upon what is, to a very considerable degree, genuine sport, which, however, is carried out in other ways to a very large extent on a commercialised basis; and the whole scheme with which such a plan is associated is one that is operating in a manner derogatory to the interests of the nation at large.
The Government have already taken steps in connection with betting and gambling by the carrying through of a scheme for the exacting of revenue there-from, and they have also set up a Betting Control Board, all of which is reckoned by the Government to be on a popular basis and likely to help them in the very distressful condition of their prospects at the General Election. But I think there is something far more important than the securing of votes or pandering to mere popularity. I reckon that the nation is confronted with very serious dangers indeed, which call for an intensifying of real convictions concerning the things that ought to be pressed forward. Knowing very well the popularity associated with sport and things
of that kind, and how that many people, who exploit the interests of the workers, give presentation cups, championship cups, and the cup is full and running over many a time, and knowing that popularity is employed to a very dangerous degree to the true interests of the Labour movement, I say that the highest duty of this House is to refuse to give this Bill an introduction.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill ordered to be brought in by Major Braithwaite, Sir Walter de Frece, Mr. Dixey, Captain Streatfeild, Mr. Hayes, Mr. Morrison and Mr. Charleton.

NEWSPAPER COMPETITIONS BILL.

"to amend the Law to permit competitions to be carried on in the newspapers for forecasting the results of football matches," presented accordingly, and read the First time; to be read a Second time upon Wednesday next, and to be printed. [Bill 54.]

Orders of the Day — LOCAL GOVERNMENT BILL

As amended, further considered.

[2ND ALLOTTED DAY.]

CLAUSE 28—(County roads.)

Mr. LOOKER: I beg to move, in page 25, line 36, to leave out the word "such," and to insert instead thereof the word "the."
This Amendment is part of the principle raised in the next Amendment on the Paper standing in my name—in page 25, line 36, at the end, to insert the words:
of draining so much of such road as lies within the district of the local authority in whom such drain or sewer is vested, but nothing in this Section shall impose upon any such local authority any obligation to enlarge or alter any such sewer.
Under the provisions of Sub-section (2) of this Clause, the county council is given the right to make use of any portion of any drain or sewer connected with a road which in the past has been used for the purposes of road drainage. There is a certain number of cases where a district authority has constructed a drain or sewer mainly for house drainage purposes, but which is also used in connection with road drainage, and under the Clause as it stands the county council would be entitled to use that drain, which really belongs to the district authority, not only for draining that portion of the area which was drained into it by the district council, but possibly also other portions of the road which are outside that area but within the functions of the county council to attend to. The object of the Amendment is to ensure that nothing in this Clause shall impose upon the local authority any obligation to enlarge or alter any drain of theirs constructed for house purposes because it is being used to a greater extent for road drainage than it was used by the actual authority to which it belongs. If a drain constructed mainly for house drainage, but used partially for draining a particular area of land, is used for draining a much greater area than that, it may have a prejudicial effect on the original purpose for which the drain was constructed.

Dr. VERNON DAVIES: I beg to second the Amendment.

4.0.p.m.

The MINISTER of HEALTH (Mr. Chamberlain): I find some difficulty in understanding what my hon. Friend is afraid of in this matter. The wording of the Clause is very similar to a provision in the Local Government Act, 1888, which provides:
where coy sewer or other drain is used for any purpose in connection with the drainage of any main road, the county council shall continue to have the right of using such sewer or drain for such purpose.
As far as I am aware, no difficulty has ever arisen in connection with that provision. If the view of my hon. Friend is that under this provision the county council could divert into a drain or sewer water from some other district outside the district in such quantities as to make the existing sewer insufficient for its purpose, and could then call upon the district council to enlarge or alter the sewer to meet this extra drain upon it, in that case, I think, my hon. Friend is not well advised, because I am informed that, under the Sub-section as it stands, the county council could claim the right to use only such facilities as now exist, and it would be quite possible, if they did call upon the district council to enlarge or alter any sewer, for the district council to refuse to do so, unless the county council were ready to enter into an agreement with them to reimburse them for any extra charge. Sub-section (3) says:
If any difference arises between the county council and any district council as respects the council in whom a drain is vested, or as to the use of any drain or sewer, the difference shall, if either council so require, he determined by the Minister.
Therefore, I think my hon. Friend need have no reason to fear, and I understand the Association of Municipal Corporations think that there is no danger in this Clause.

Mr. LOOKER: Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that Sub-section (3) really covers the case where a difference arises between a county council and a district council as to the extended use of a drain such as I have referred to? Some doubt has been raised as to it by those who are qualified to speak.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I am satisfied that the Minister could determine such a point as that.

Mr. SPEAKER: Does the hon. Member wish to withdraw his Amendment?

Mr. LOOKER: Yes, Sir.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

CLAUSE 29.—(Transfer to county councils of functions with respect to highways in, rural districts.)

Sir EDMUND TURTON: I beg to move, in page 26, to leave out from the word "that" in line 11, to the word "as" in line 13.
The object of my Amendment is, of course, in order to insert the words which appear subsequently on the Paper:
a county council shall be entitled to exercise concurrently with a rural district council the functions conferred upon rural district councils by the Local Government Act, 1894.
The House will be aware that, under Section 26 of the Local Government Act, 1894, the duty of the district council was to protect public rights of way and to prevent unlawful encroachments on roadside wastes. There is no desire whatever to interfere with the rights of the district council or in any way to amend that Section, but I submit to the Minister that it would be both illogical and inconvenient that when these matters are transferred to the county councils they should not have concurrent powers with the district councils in regard to these matters. I am sure everyone would desire that every possible facility should be given to public authorities, not only to preserve rights of way but also to prevent unlawful encroachments on wayside land, and, therefore, all we ask in this Amendment is not to prevent a district council carrying out their duties, which they have done quite well in the past, but that in regard to those roads which are to be transferred to the county councils, this House will give concurrent jurisdiction to the county councils to see that these public rights are kept, and that there is no interference by anybody with those rights.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: I beg to second the Amendment.

The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Colonel Ashley): I am sure everybody in this House desires that the public should be protected as regards rights of way and encroachments on roadside wastes. But, really, this Amendment is quite unnecessary. Under the Act of 1888, Section 11 (1), the county council already have power to look after roadside wastes, and that power remains, and it remains also with the rural district council under the Act of 1894. Therefore, the rights of the public are well protected. As regards rights of way, the power now vests in the rural district council. If they do not act, the county council can act, and I submit that that covers that point. After all, do let us have some sympathy with, and leave some work for the rural district councils. Surely rights of way are matters which a district council can look after, and this Amendment, I think, is quite unnecessary.

Sir E. TURTON: I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment, after the assurance of my right hon. Friend.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Colonel ASHLEY: I beg to move, in page 26, line 14, at the end, to insert the words:
or any functions not being functions with respect to highways exerciseable at the appointed day by rural district councils as successors to surveyors of highways or highway boards.
This is a small Amendment to cover rather unusual cases. Sometimes there are cases where the rural district council is liable under enclosure awards to pay something towards the upkeep of a road or drain, and this simply continues their powers to do so. Without the Amendment their powers would cease.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 30.—(Transfer of classified roads in urban districts to county council.)

Mr. LOOKER: I beg to move, in page 28, line 12, to leave out, the words "or added to an urban district."
This Amendment relates to Sub-section (6), which provides that where a rural district is constituted an urban district the Order may provide that any unclassified roads within that area, which formerly would have been looked after by the urban district, may be looked after
by the county council, contributions being made by the urban district to the county council. The Clause also contains a provision which brings in those cases where a rural district or portion of a rural district is added to an existing urban district, which has already got its own highway authority and also maintains its own unclassified roads. I think it is extremely unlikely that any urban district, which already has its own highway authority for unclassified roads, would require a county council to maintain the unclassified roads in the area added to it. If any necessity does arise for an arrangement of that description, it can be equally well carried out under the provisions of Clause 33, and I hope, therefore, my Amendment will he accepted by the right hon. Gentleman.

Dr. DAVIES: I beg to second the Amendment.

Colonel ASHLEY: I think this is a reasonable Amendment, and I accept it.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. LOOKER: Before we part with Clause 30, there is one small point to which I would like to draw my right hon. Friend's attention.

Mr. SPEAKER: I am afraid the hon. Member cannot do it unless he has an Amendment down.

CLAUSE 31.—(Rights of certain urban district councils to maintain county roads.)

Colonel ASHLEY: I beg to move, in page 28, line 23, to leave out the words "according to the last census for the time being."
The House will remember that when we were discussing this Bill in Committee, the point was raised that it was rather unfair upon certain urban district councils that they should not be able to claim to exercise the functions under this Clause, because the means of ascertaining the size of their population was the last census. That would undoubtedly cut out a certain number of important urban districts which now have a population of 25,000 or 30,000. Therefore, I promised consideration of an hon. Member's suggestion that we should take the estimated population according to the Registrar-General. It would have been
better, of course, to have been able to take the year 1929, but the Registrar-General's estimate is always twelve months in arrear, and, therefore, we are obliged to take the year 1928. This Amendment simply carries out the pledge given that instead of the census being taken, the Registrar-General's estimate should be taken, and, therefore, a good many urban district councils will be brought in who would otherwise be cut out.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. LOOKER: I beg to move, in page 28, line 29, after the word "and," to insert the words:
shall continue to be, or shall become, the highway authority as respects that road, and.
Under Clause 28 the county council is constituted the highway authority for all roads which now become county roads but under this Clause certain urban district councils with a population exceeding 20,000 are given the right to claim to exercise the functions of maintenance and repair of such county roads. If anybody could properly be described as the highway authority in respect of any roads, it naturally would be the authority responsible for their maintenance and repair. Apart from that, it is possible that there may be some powers necessarily exercised by the authority maintaining the road incident to the expression "the highway authority," and which the urban district claiming these roads would not possess unless they were constituted the highway authority. Therefore, the object of this Amendment is to constitute them the highway authority, instead of the county council, in all cases where they have exercised their right to maintain and repair the roads within their area.

Dr. DAVIES: I beg to second the Amendment.

Colonel ASHLEY: I accept this Amendment, which seems to be quite reasonable. If a road is vested in an urban district council, it is quite reasonable that that council should be the highway authority.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether this affects the point I raised yesterday with regard to roads?

Colonel ASHLEY: It does not affect that.

Amendment agreed to.

Colonel ASHLEY: I beg to move, in page 28, line 31, after the second word "of," to insert the words "and other dealing with."
This is really a drafting Amendment to remove any doubt as to the powers of the claiming authority in this matter. It simply gives them complete powers.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made:

In page 28, leave out from the word "thousand," in line 36, to the word "and," in line 38, and insert instead thereof the words "at the appointed day."

In page 29, line 3, leave out the words "subsequent census," and insert instead thereof the words "census subsequent to the appointed day."—[Colonel Ashley.]

Colonel ASHLEY: I beg to move, in page 29, line 7, at the end, to insert the words:
(c) in the case of an Act or Order being made adding an area to an existing urban district of which the population exceeds twenty thousand within twelve months after the date when the Act or Order takes effect.
This Amendment enables an urban authority which already exceeds 20,000 population to exercise claiming powers in respect of any county roads which may be added to their area.

Amendment agreed to.

Colonel ASHLEY: I beg to move, in page 29, line 9, after the word "or," to insert the words "of an Act or Order."
This is really a drafting Amendment, because sometimes extensions are made under an Act and not by an Order, and this will enable it to be either an Act or an Order.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made:

In page 29, line 13, leave out the words "according to the last census for the time being."

In line 15, after the second word "the," insert the words "Act or."—[Colonel Ashley.]

Colonel ASHLEY: I beg to move, in page 29, line 18, to leave out the words
the last foregoing paragraph," and to insert instead thereof the words "any of the last three foregoing paragraphs.
In the Amendment on the Order Paper, the words are "two foregoing paragraphs." This must now be changed to three, because we have put in another paragraph.
Amendment agreed to.

Colonel ASHLEY: I beg to move, in page 29, line 29, to leave out the word "such," and to insert instead thereof the word "any."
Although technically a drafting Amendment, this is, if I may be Irish, consequential on a subsequent Amendment in my name, in page 29, line 38, after the word "council," to insert the words:
(b) being situate in a county within which at the commencement of this Act there was in force a local Act empowering urban district councils to relinquish any functions of maintenance and repair retained by them in pursuance of a claim made under Subsection (2) of Section 11 of the Local Government Act, 1888, are roads as respects which the urban district council were not exercising the functions of maintenance and repair at the commencement of this Act.
May I explain what the proposed new Sub-section (b) means. In the case of Middlesex—and I think there may be others—an Act was passed in 1898 to enable the urban district councils to renounce their right of claiming under the Act of 1888, and to hand over all their powers of maintaining and improving roads to the county council. Middlesex is a very thickly populated area, and, unless such an Amendment be made, practically the whole of the powers of the county council to maintain roads—and they have done it extremely well—might lapse. The result would be that the roads would go back to the several areas and the whole administration of Middlesex would come to an end. This Amendment would ensure that the status quo would be maintained.

Sir HERBERT NIELD: I should like to reinforce the observations of the Minister. The county of Middlesex is in a peculiar position. Hon. Members who are motorists will know how for the most part there are very good thoroughfares in the county. For many years past, since arterial roads have come into being, an enormous sum of money has been spent by Middlesex in constructing, not merely
large arterial roads, but in making a north circular road intended to do what one might have mentioned yesterday in the discussion on the Corporation of London (Bridge) Bill, that is to say, to take the traffic away from the great centres, and to enable it to pass outside and to get down to the docks and elsewhere where the heavy industries are carried on. The Act of 1898 enabled Middlesex to deal with the special conditions of a rapidly developing district outside London. Once district councils under the Act of 1888 had claimed to maintain their own roads, they could not withdraw, and the Act of 1898 gave the district councils the power to reconsider the matter in the light of their experience. The greater number—some 30 in all—agreed to come under that Act. They offered no opposition to it passing through the House, and the result has been that amicable arrangements have been made with them where the county has taken over the roads, with great advantage to the district and to the uniformity of the surface of the roads.
If the original Clause were retained in this Bill, the Great West Road would be divided among 13 different authorities, all probably with different methods of constructing roads. In cases where district councils still maintain their own roads, they have been willing to make agreements with the county council that they should act as the agents of the county council in the care of the roads. We have therefore established over a long period complete uniformity, agreement, and concord between these various authorities, and it would be lamentable if one result of this Bill were to create disaster and consternation in Middlesex. I hope that in view of the large expenditure that has already been made by the county council on these big roads, the House will accept the Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made:

In page 29, line 29, leave out the second word "as," and insert instead thereof the words "which—(a)." —[Colonel Ashley.]

Colonel ASHLEY: I beg to move, in page 29, to leave out from the word "construction," in line 31, to the word "under," in line 32, and to insert instead thereof the words:
or improvement of which by the county council advances have been made.
The necessity of this Amendment is to show that the roads to which the Clause applies are those constructed or improved by the county council.

Mr. SOMERVILLE: I should like to mention that the Amendments which stand in my name on this page of the Order Paper are in the fortunate position of being covered by the Amendments moved by my right hon. Friend.

Mr. SPEAKER: If the Amendment which has just been moved by the Minister of Transport is carried in the form proposed, it will prevent the hon. Baronet the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Sir E. Turton) moving his Amendment—In
page 29, line 32, to leave out the words "to the county council," and to insert instead thereof the words "or agreed to be made."—I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman can come to some understanding in order to simplify the matter.

Colonel ASHLEY: am not in a position to accept the hon. Baronet's Amendment.

Sir E.TRATON: Perhaps I may be allowed to move my Amendment.

Mr. SPEAKER: If the Amendment of the Minister were carried, the Amendment of the hon. Baronet would fall.

Sir E. TURTON: I am in your hands, Sir, but I think that I have very good reasons for placing before the Minister of Transport why my Amendment ought to be accepted.

Mr. SPEAKER: I am anxious to do my best for the hon. Baronet, but I cannot do any more for him than I have done.

Amendment agreed to.

Colonel ASHLEY: I beg to move, in page 29, line 33, after the word "council," to insert the words:
or (b) being situate in a county within which at the commencement of this Act there was in force a local Act empowering urban district councils to relinquish any functions of maintenance and repair retained by them in pursuance of a claim made under Sub-section (2) of Section 11 of the Local Government Act, 1888, are roads as respects which the urban district council were not exercising the functions of maintenance and repair at the commencement of this Act.

Mr. LOOKER: I have put down an Amendment to this Amendment, but I am not anxious to propose unnecessary alterations. As I understand my right hon. Friend's Amendment, the effect would be that an urban district which has not now a population of 20,000 or over, but may have a popultation of 20,000 or over in a few years' time will then be deprived of its right to claim to maintain the roads in its area, because the council of that district was not exercising those functions at the commencement of the Act. If my right hon. Friend is satisfied that that is not so, or will undertake to look into it with a view to remedying it if it should prove to be so, I shall be satisfied.

Colonel ASHLEY: As I read it, and as I am advised, the council of such an urban district would be able to claim that right, of course subject to the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Transport; but if it is said that these authorities are, under the Bill as we are putting it through, prevented from making such a claim, I will look into the matter again, and if I am satisfied that a case is made out, no doubt in another place it can be considered again. I hope my hon. Friend will be satisfied on that assurance to allow this Amendment, to be passed.

Amendment agreed to.

Sir H. NIELD: I beg to move, in page 29, line 41, to leave out the words "may determine," and to insert instead thereof the words:
of Transport may by Order determine, and every such Order shall he laid before Parliament as soon as may be after it is made.
The Minister has put his name down to this Amendment, which is an indication that he accepts it, but he has left me to move it. The object of this Amendment is to secure that any action which he may take under this particular Clause shall be the subject of an order, and that the order shall be laid upon the Table of the House. It bears on the point which we discussed last week regarding action which can be taken by a Department and it is in order to secure that Parliament shall have the control that I have put down this Amendment, in conjunction with my hon. Friend the Member for North Tottenham (Mr. R.
Morrison). I am very glad to think the Minister has associated himself with it and accepts it.

Colonel ASHLEY: When my right hon. and learned Friend brought this matter to my notice, I at once accepted his suggestion that any order of the Minister should be laid before Parliament, because the Ministry of Transport is most democratic in all its proceedings.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made:

In page 30, line 20, leave out the words "according to the census of nineteen hundred and twenty-one," and insert instead thereof the words "at the appointed day."

In page 30, line 32, at the end, insert the words:
and
(b) the population of an urban district shall, subject as hereinafter provided, be deemed to be the population thereof according to the last census for the time being:
Provided that the population of any urban district at the appointed day shall be taken to be the estimated population of that district for the year nineteen hundred and twenty-eight."—[Colonel Ashley.]

CLAUSE 32.—(Contributions by county councils to county roads maintained by urban district councils.)

Mr. LOOKER: I beg to move, in page 30, line 37, after the word "payments" to insert the words "(by quarterly instalments)."
This is a matter which was raised on the Committee stage and is now, I understand, the subject of an agreement between the parties concerned.

Sir E. TURTON: I beg to second the Amendment.I do so with much pleasure. It has been the subject of agreement, and I am very glad to have the opportunity of seconding it.

Colonel ASHLEY: I understand that the hon. Baronet the Member for Thirsk (Sir E. Turton) speaks for the County Councils' Association. May I understand that my hon. Friend the Member for South East Essex (Mr. Looker) speaks for the Urban District Councils' Association?

Mr. LOOKER: Yes, and I have also been in communication with the Association of Municipal Corporations.

Colonel ASHLEY: This is a matter which has been the subject of considerable negotiations between all the parties concerned. When it was raised on the Committee stage, I promised that if an agreement could be reached between the parties chiefly concerned I would suggest to the House that it might legitimately implement the understanding and allow the payments to be made by quarterly instalments. I think the Amendment which seeks to leave put the word "January" and to insert the word "December" might also be accepted; in place of either January or November we compromise on the 15th December. If that is the wish of the House, I shall be very glad to accept the Amendment.

Sir E. TURTON: I very cordially support the suggestion made by the Minister of Transport. It has been agreed that the estimates are to be sent forward in December. We should have preferred them in November, but in that spirit of conciliation which is symptomatic of all county council proceedings we are prepared to accept the amended date, in exactly the same way as we are ready to give the urban district councils their payments quarterly.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. LOOKER: I beg to move, in page 31, line 16, to leave out the word "January," and to insert instead thereof the word "December."
This Amendment has also been agreed upon by the various associations concerned.

Dr. DAVIES: I beg to second the Amendment.

Colonel ASHLEY: I accept it.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 34.—(Delegation of road functions by county councils to district councils.)

Sir E. TURTON: I beg to move, in page 32, line 18, after the word "of," to insert the words "all or any of."
This Clause apparently contemplates the delegation of the functions of maintenance and repair and improvements. As there may be some instances in which it may he necessary to delegate some improvement scheme, I think it is necessary to insert the words which I have proposed.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: I beg to second the Amendment.

Colonel ASHLEY: I do not think I can accept this Amendment. If the county council does decide to delegate its functions to the rural district council, it must delegate all the functions and not some of them.

Amendment negatived.

CLAUSE 35.—(Conditions and effects of delegation of functions.)

Colonel ASHLEY: I beg to move, in page 34, line 32, at the end to insert the words:
(b) that the district council shall comply with any requirement of the county council as to the manner in which and the persons by whom any works are to be carried out and with any general directions of the county council as to the terms of contracts to be entered into for such purposes; and.
I think it is only fair and right that this Amendment should be inserted, in order to enable the county councils to have real control over the work which they delegate to the district councils as their agents. During the Committee stage, several Amendments were put down by the hon. Baronet the Member for Thirsk (Sir E. Turton) as to the control of costs and control of the action of the district councils in other ways. We did not think that was the best way of giving control, but this Amendment does distinctly lay down that the district council shall comply with any requirements of the county council as to the manner in which and the persons by whom the works are to be carried out, and with any general direction from the county council as to the terms of contract to be entered into. I trust this will meet the legitimate claims of the county councils to have, proper control over the work of their agents.

Sir E. TURTON: I am very much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for having carried out the wishes of the county councils. I think this Amendment meets entirely the objections which were felt in the first instance.

Mr. WEDGWOOD BENN: I am not well informed about the details of this matter, but it occurs to me that it is possible that a county council is much more likely to be a body on which Labour representation is as we think, inadequate, whereas a district council is a
body on which a great many working men can find places, it being a smaller body. Supposing the district council wished to do this work by direct labour. Under this Amendment, would the county council be able to say, "No, we will not permit you to do this by direct labour; you must do it under contract in the way we think best"? That is the sort of query which arises in the mind of anyone who is not very well instructed on these matters, and I should be glad if the Minister, if he has had time to give attention to this matter after his activities at Queen's Hall last night, could give me some explanation.

Colonel ASHLEY: I gather that the hon. Member was at the Queen's Hall last night, and I hope he has profited by the speech made. I would point out that this question has nothing to do with Labour or anything else. This is simply a Clause to enable a county council, whether it be a Labour county council or a reactionary county council, as he would call it, to control the acts of its agents. I do not know, but I presume that if the county council wished to do it by direct labour it could do so, but then it would not be delegating its functions to the district council.

Mr. A. R. KENNEDY: I am not officially in the confidence of either the district councils or the county councils, but I cannot help being struck by the way in which this Bill, if this Amendment be accepted, will tie hand and foot the district councils in the performance of this duty. I think the hon. Member who raised the question was quite right, and that the effect of the Amendment will be that the county councils could require the work to be done by the district councils through the county council's own servants, or any servants whatever. I cannot conceive of a district council exercising delegated powers with any heart or pleasure or any large measure of success if it is not to be allowed to exercise any discretion whatever. It is quite clear that under the Bill as it is proposed to be amended the county council are to have the control of the finance of the work. They are to have absolute discretion as to the way the work is to be done, and also as to the contracts entered into for that purpose. While I recognise that it is very desirable
to conciliate the district council by giving them the right to do work as agents of the county council, it seems to me that whilst giving them that power we are depriving them of any discretion in the discharge of their duties.

Mr. HARRIS: I have had some experience of similar conditions in relation to the Metropolitan borough councils and the London County Council. As I understand the point, we are considering the county council, having decided to employ the district council as agents to do road repairs or to construct roads, naturally they would desire to be able to lay down the terms. Under this provision I assume that the county council could require that the borough council should pay trade union rates of wages and observe trade union conditions in any contracts entered into by them. It would be undesirable if a borough council paid rates, when carrying out contract work or any other kind of work, less than the rates prevailing in the district. The London County Council requires all its contracts to be carried out under trade union rates and trade union conditions. We want to know exactly where we are going, and if the purpose of these words is as I understand the matter, I think they are satisfactory, but the point ought to be made clear.

Mr. KELLY: I hope that the Minister of Transport is going to explain the point we are discussing a little more clearly. The Amendment says:
That the district council shall comply with any requirement of the county council as to the manner in which and the persons by whom any works are to be carried out.
What is meant by that provision? As I understand it the county councils are to control not only the manner in which the work is to be done but they have also the power to decide as to the person by whom any works are to be carried out. I accept the definition of the Minister of Transport that a council may be either a Labour council or a reactionary council. The county council will be the reactionary party in more cases than the other parties, and if the House is going to impose conditions as to the manner in which work shall be carried out, and conditions as to the persons who shall perform that work, then we have every reason to be doubtful as to the results of this proposal, and we
should do our best to prevent these particular words being inserted in the Bill. The latter part of the Amendment says:
and with any general directions of the county council as to the terms of contracts to be entered into for such purposes.
Does that mean that if there are good conditions attached to particular people and the local council desire that these conditions should operate, the county council may disagree and decide that the had conditions should operate. There are many councils in this country operating very bad conditions at the present time, and they have been doing so for the last two years. I want to know if this Amendment gives power to reactionary bodies to impose the bad conditions I have mentioned upon the local councils. If this Amendment is insisted upon I trust that we shall divide against it, because my opinion is that the Bill would be made worse by the insertion of this Amendment.

Mr. WILLIAM BENNETT: I would like to know if this Amendment has been proposed in consequence of the Clause that has been added to the Bill applying to London. If so, I think it is most unfortunate. London boroughs have works committees and they employ a good deal of direct labour, and this proposal seems to be a complete reversal of the methods hitherto adopted by the councils.

Colonel ASHLEY: This Amendment has nothing to do with London.

Commander WILLIAMS: May I be allowed to congratulate the hon. Member for South Battersea (Mr. W. Bennett), who is, I believe, an elector in my constituency, on the success of his first effort in this House. May I ask the Minister of Transport what there is left for the district councils to do. I do not see what the local authorities can do in these matters except to supervise the work. As this Amendment may go a little further than was intended, I would like to ask whether it would be possible to reconsider this point when the Measure is under consideration in another place.

Mr. BENN: This is a legislative assembly and this constant reference to another place is most unworthy.

Commander WILLIAMS: I quite agree, but I understand that some very im-
portant matters are coming up fur consideration, and I made that suggestion in order to get out of the difficulty in which we appear to be placed.

Mr. ARTHUR GREENWOOD: Subsection (1) of the Clause we are considering provides that:
(1) Where in pursuance of the last foregoing Section functions are delegated to a district council, the district council, in the discharge of those functions, shall act as agents for the county council, and it shall be a condition of any such delegation—
(a) that the works to be executed and the expenditure to be incurred by the district council in the discharge of those functions shall be subject to the approval of the county council.
The Amendment we are now discussing provides:
(b) that the district council shall comply with any requirement of the county council as to the manner in which and the persons by whom any works are to be carried out and with any general directions of the county council as to the terms of contracts to be entered into for such purposes.
There is a further provision in Subsection (1), paragraph (b):
That the works shall be completed to the satisfaction of the county council.
I submit that the two provisions I have read which are already in Clause 55 with regard to the control of expenditure incurred by the district council and the condition that the work shall be completed to the satisfaction of the county council are all that is necessary to meet the case without adding this new condition, the effect of which is that the district council must subordinate itself in every particular to the county council. The effect of this Amendment is that a district council has not a soul to call its own so far as the powers delegated to it are concerned. The county council can interfere in regard to the uttermost detail in the works that are to be carried out as to the way they are to be carried out as well as the actual terms of the contract. This is an unwarrantable interference with the rights of district councils who simply become the agent of the county councils and they are not to be permitted to choose the method which they think best.
5.0 p.m.
The county council may actually lay down the form in which the work shall be carried out. The county council may make arrangements with a firm which is on what we call the Black List, and
however strongly the district council might feel about the matter, they would have to submit because the county council have the real power in the matter. The county council have power to determine the particular people who will be employed to do a job, and they might make a recommendation for the purpose of victimising workers, a thing which is not unknown in some areas. The county council might insist that certain persons should not be employed, although the district council might have sufficient confidence in those people to wish to employ them. It would be perfectly competent for the county council to lay down conditions with regard to wages and the hours of the people employed, and they might even go so far as to ignore the Fair Wages Clause. After all the poor district councils have been shorn of a good many of their responsibilities as a result of this Bill, and at least it might be left to them to carry out their delegated duties in the way they think best. We shall certainly go into the Division Lobby against this most reactionary Clause. I should be very sorry to think that the county councils association, or any of the associations which seem to be on such good terms with the Government this afternoon, have supported this proposal. Many of the Amendments suggested by the county councils association were approved of on this side of the House. Do not they feel that already they have done sufficient for the district councils within their area? I imagine that the hon. Baronet, whose experience in this matter we all know to be very considerable, feels himself a little dissatisfied and perhaps a little unhappy that this Amendment should have been introduced. Before we proceed further I hope we may have a more adequate explanation from the Minister of Transport. I am afraid that nothing he can say can make this Amendment, appeal to us very much, but I think the House is entitled to a little fuller explanation than has so far been given.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I am afraid that the ingenuity of hon. Members opposite in importing into this discussion the question of direct labour has, perhaps, a little taken the attention of the House off from
what the realities of the situation really are. The House must remember that in this matter the district councils act as the agents of the county councils. It is the county council which has got to find the money. It is the county council which has to approve the works which are to be instituted, and it is the county council which will be liable if any damage or loss is involved to any third party by reason of the unlawful action or the negligent behaviour of its agent. Possibly, hon. Members may remember that there was a proposal put forward in Committee, I think, by the representatives of the county councils, that the district councils should have this liability put upon them; a liability to be responsible for any such losses or damage or costs or expenses inurred by reason of their unlawful or negligent action in regard to the work to be performed.
That was resisted by my right hon. Friend on the ground that the county council really was the responsible authority, and that it was not right to put this responsibility upon the district council. I am sure that my right hon. Friend was correct in that view and that we really must protect the county council against the negligent action of their agents, and that is why it is necessary to put these words in here, in order to give the requisite protection to the county council. It is fantastic to imagine that the awful things suggested by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. Greenwood) would follow, but it is quite true that, under this Amendment the county council, who have to find the money, will be able to say in regard to a certain contract: "This contract for such and such a road we do not approve of," or "We do not think that such and such a contractor in our opinion should have this contract because he is not fit to be entrusted with the work."

Mr. BENN: Can the county councils, for example, say that they will not have a fair wages clause in their contract?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I think every county council has a fair wages clause in its contract. [HON. MEMBERS "No, not all!"] I do not know of any county council that has not, but the conditions here would be exactly the same as in the case of a county council which had not delegated its powers but which has retained matters in its own hands. If there
is any difficulty to be anticipated in this case, it is, I think, precisely the same as is to be anticipated in any case where people are entrusted with duties. What is the use of local government if you do not give them power to carry out their duties? Hon. Members opposite suggest that the county councils cannot be trusted in a matter of this kind, but I do not think they will find the majority of the House will agree with them.

Miss LAWRENCE: I want the House to consider what these proposals for delegation really mean and, how in my view, they will do nothing but produce a crop of most violent quarrels between the county councils and the district councils. Let us consider what delegation in the circumstances proposed really means. The county council settles what is to be done. The county council has to direct how the work is to be done and the work is done. What on earth is the use of delegation in such circumstances as those? Here we are back again really at the central problem of free-will. How are you to give people liberty if at the same time you do not give them the liberty to do things in their own way? If the county council is really to delegate the work it should place trust in the district council, but, under this proposal, the district council is to be deprived of all discretion.
I know of one example which I am sure every Minister of Health looks back upon with horror. It is the example of the machinery under the Addison housing scheme. There it meant that every action of every housing authority in detail was reviewed, because the Government found the money. That meant a duplication of officials and it meant that matters were made very tiresome to the housing authority and it also meant that it cost the country a great deal of money. Delegation of this sort means that the work has got to be done twice over. The county council has got to plan it, and the district council has got to plan it. The district council has to get the contract and to make the arrangement. The county council has to criticise and alter. If delegation is to be no better than that, then I say unhesitatingly that we had better have no delegation at all. I would point out that no delegation can take place except by the will of the county council. If they are aware that any
district is particularly foolish or hotheaded they can refrain from delegation.

Colonel ASHLEY: Subject to the approval of the Minister.

Miss LAWRENCE: Yes; subject to the approval of the Minister, but if the county council is of opinion that a particular council is so badly off or so badly managed that it is not competent for the work it need not delegate. Delegation can only take place if the county council is willing to delegate.

Colonel ASHLEY: What is the use of leaving power to the Minister to determine if he cannot determine it in the way he wishes?

Miss LAWRENCE: Do I understand that the Minister can force a county council to delegate work to an authority of which they disapprove? I do not think so. In the Bill it will be seen that the county council can do it with the consent of the Minister. My point is that delegation is a, meaningless word unless you give some power to the district council. If you say that the county council must determine the extent of the work, must approve the work and settle how the work is to be done, you create a state of affairs in which you had very much better have no delegation at all. This Clause makes the powers of delegation an absurdity, and it is calculated only to produce the maximum of friction without giving any benefit.

Captain HENDERSON: I think the House has rather missed a point in this discussion. What we are aiming at under this Bill is to get better roads. I think the hon. Lady was not present earlier in the Debate when we heard the conditions that had accrued to Middlesex owing to these powers being vested by mutual agreements in the central authority. We heard how that had led to a uniform pattern of roads and to the greatest economy. Under this delegation if the county councils wish to get uniformity of treatment of their roads throughout their system they must have the right, in all common sense, to determine the type of roads and how those roads are to be made. That, primarily, is the object of this Clause. If this Amendment is not adopted, we shall run the grave risk of perpetuating all that we have heard about the different authorities and the different
roads run by different district councils within a county, each making their own pattern roads. If the county councils are to pay their agents they must, in all common sense, have the right of laying down what exactly is the type of road to be used. There is grave risk, if this Amendment is not passed, of having a large number of varied types of road throughout a county.

Mr. OLIVER: I am afraid the last speaker, like the Minister of Transport, has not troubled to read the Clause. I listened with great respect to the Minister of Health. I followed him closely, but there was nothing that he said that was not already covered by the Clause as it is now printed. The Clause distinctly delegates powers to a district council. The county council must be responsible for negligence on the part of the district council. So far as I can see there is no need for this Amendment in order to carry out what the Minister of Health has already said. The second point is that the delegated duties must be performed subject to the approval of the county council. You have already given to the county council power which, in itself, is quite adequate to meet the reasonable demand in regard to the duties which one would expect a district council to perform. Already it is stated in the Clause:
(b) that the works shall be completed to the satisfaction of the county council.
I want to know why this Clause, as printed, does not meet the requirements laid down by the Minister of Health? The only requirement, so far as I understand the matter, that is not met is the point that has already been put forward by the hon. Gentleman the Member for North Aberdeen (Mr. Wedgwood Benn). This does give the county council a power which might be exercised to an extraordinary extent. It is not a question of efficiently carrying out certain work, as the last speaker suggested. The Minister of Health will no doubt be well acquainted with the controversy which has taken place on the various municipal bodies respecting the building of houses by direct labour, where money has been saved, where the efficiency of the work executed has never been challenged, but where because the system embodies two opposing principles, one section has
approved and the other section has disapproved. The members of the district councils, being members of the smaller local bodies, differ somewhat from the members of the county councils, and they will make proposals for the carrying out of work which will not be approved of by the county councils. Here we get the right of the county council not to take into consideration the efficiency of the proposal, but, according to this Amendment, they are given the right to do certain things and impose their will on the district council, although the district council may be taking the most businesslike view of the thing. The only thing, so far as I can see, that is left to the district councils, shorn of practically every power that they possess, is not to do the work at all, and that is the sum and substance of what will happen if this Amendment be carried. For this reason I hope that the House—and I am sure they will have behind them, not only the district councils, but the best instructed opinion in the country really concerned with good local government—will reject this Amendment.

Sir ELLIS HUME-WILLIAMS: I should like to say just a word on this Amendment. Apparently the county council are to be responsible—they will have to pay—and the district council will only be acting as their agent. Is it not just, in those circumstances, that as county councils will have to pay ultimately, they should also have the power, which this Amendment seeks to give them, of controlling the terms of the contract? Is it not correct that, in regard to questions such as the price at which the works are to be executed, and so on—the terms of the contract—the principal in the matter, who is going to pay, should have the right to control what the terms of the contract are to be? I agree with the hon. Member who spoke last that it is scarcely a matter of delegation at all, and that really the county council is the principal in the matter. The county council retains the responsibility, and, therefore, should be allowed also to control the terms of the contract.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 204; Noes, 124.

Division No. 196.]
AYES.
[5.18 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Nelson, Sir Frank


Albery, Irving James
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Neville, Sir Reginald J.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Frece, Sir Walter de
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Gates, Percy
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Cower, Sir Robert
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Pownall, Sir Assheton


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E.)
Ralne, Sir Walter


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Ramsden, E.


Berry, sir George
Hamilton, Sir George
Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington]


Bethel, A.
Hammersley, S. S.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Betterton, Henry B.
Hanbury, C.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'tt'y)


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Harland, A.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)


Blundell, F. N.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Ropner, Major L.


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. [Oxf'd, Henley)
Ross, R, D.


Brass, Captain W.
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian
Ruggles-Brise. Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Bridgeman Rt. Hon. William Clive
Hills, Major John Waller
Rye, F. G.


Brings, J. Harold
Hilton, Cecil
Salmon, Major I.


Briscoe, Richard George
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Sandeman, N. Stewart


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Sandon, Lord


Buchan, John
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Bassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Buckingham, Sir H.
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Savery, S. S.


Burman, J. B.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Shepperson, E. W.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Skelton, A. N.


Campbell, E. T.
Hume, Sir G. H.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Carver, Major W. H.
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Smithers, Waldron


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Hurst, Gerald B.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Iveagh, Countess of
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.


Churchman, Sir Arthur C.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Clarry, Reginald George
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Str[...]atfeild, Captain S. R.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
King, Commodore Henry Douglas
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Colfox, Major William Phillips
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Cooper, A. Duff
Knox, Sir Alfred
Sugden. Sir Wilfrid


Cope, Major Sir William
Lamb, J. Q.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Cooper, J. B.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Lloyd. Cyril E. (Dudley)
Tinne, J. A.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Titchfild, Major the Marquess of


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islingtn., N.)
Loder, J. de V.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Craig, Sir Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Looker, Herbert William
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Crooke, J. Smedley (Derltend)
Lougher, Lewis
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindscy, Gainsbro)
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Warrender, Sir Victor


Dalkeith, Earl of
Lumley, L. R.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Maclntyre, Ian
Watts, Sir Thomas


Davies, Dr. Vernon
McLean, Major A.
Wells, S. R.


Dawson, Sir Philip
Macqulsten, F. A.
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Duckworth, John
Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Edmondson, Major A, J.
Margesson, Captain D.
Windsor-Clive, Lleut.-Colonel George


Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrlngton)
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Meller, R. J.
Withers, John James


Ellis, R. G.
Merrlman, Sir F. Boyd
Womersley, W. J.


England, Colonel A.
Meyer, Sir Frank
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s M.)
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Worthlngton-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Everard, W. Lindsay
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.



Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Major Sir George Hcnnessy and Mr. Penny.




NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife. West)
Bellamy, A.
Buchanan, G.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillebro'l
Benn, Wedgwood
Buxton. Rt. Hon. Noel


Ammon, Charles George
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Cape, Thomas


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Bondfield, Margaret
Charleton, H. C.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Clarke, A. B.


Barnes, A.
Broad, F. A.
Compton, Joseph


Barr, J.
Bromfield, William
Cove, W. G.


Batey, Joseph
Bromley, J.
Crawfurd, H. E.


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Dalton, Hugh




Day, Harry
Kirkwood, D.
Shinwell, E.


Dennison, R.
Lawrence, Susan
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Dunnico, H.
Lawson, John James
Sitch, Charles H.


Edge, Sir William
Longbottom, A. W.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Sedwellty)
Lowth, T.
Shell, Harry


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Lunn, William
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Gibbins, Joseph
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Stamford, T. W.


Gillett, George M.
Mackinder, W.
Stephen, Campbell


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
MacLaren, Andrew
Stewart, J. (St. Rolfox)


Greenall, T.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Strauss, E. A.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Taylor, R. A.


Griffith, F. Kingsley
March, S.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Ponlypool)
Maxton, James
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Groves, T.
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Thorne. G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Grundy, T. W.
Morris, R. H.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Thurtle, Ernest


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Mosley, Sir Oswald
Tinker, John Joseph


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Oliver, George Harold
Tomilnson, R. P.


Hardie, Georae D.
Palln, John Henry
Townend, A. E.


Harris, Percy A.
Paling, W.
Viant, s. P.


Hayday, Arthur
Parkinson, John Allen (Wlgan)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Hayes, John Henry
Pethick- Lawrence, F. W.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Hirst, G. H.
Ponsonby, Arthur
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Joslah


Hirst, w. (Bradford, South)
Potts, John S.
Wellock, Wilfred


Hollins, A.
Purcell, A. A.
Welsh, J. C.


Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Runciman, Hilda (Cornwall, St. Ives)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Hunciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Saklatvala, Shapurji
Windsor, Walter


Kelly, W. T.
Scrymgeour, E.
Wright, W.


Kennedy, T.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)



Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. Whiteley and Mr. T. Henderson.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: I beg to move, in page 35, line 12, at the end, to insert the words:
(a) The county council shall provide for notice being sent to each district council of any meeting of the county council committee at which business relating to the area of the district council is to be transacted, and the chairman or other representative of the district council shall he entitled to be present at and take part in the proceedings of the county council committee at any such meeting so far as they relate to that area but shall not be entitled to vote.
Under the Bill we are handing over to the county councils powers which used to be exercised by the district councils, and it is necessary, if the scheme is to be a success, that we should do our best to try to remove friction, and to induce the district councils to pull together with the county council for the common good of the county in which they are all interested. There is no doubt that at the present time there is a considerable amount of suspicion among district councils that they will not be consulted in matters affecting roads. It is, however, necessary to keep that local knowledge of roads which cannot be obtained from anyone except the district councils. The House will remember that we have already made provision for consultation between the guardians committee and the public assistance committee of the
county council with respect to the Poor Law; and, if consultation is necessary in that case, it is also necessary in regard to the roads.
This Amendment follows very closely the wording of what we have already passed in Clause 7 with regard to guardians committees, and its only object is to remove friction and help to make things run smoothly, and to remove the suspicion on the part of the district councils that the county council will not consult them. It will ensure proper and effective consultation between them. I should be quite prepared to accept the Amendment which has been put down to my Amendment by my hon. Friend the Member for Thirsk and Malton (Sir E. Turton)—in line 2, after the word "business," to insert the word "specially." That would, I think, remove any objection which the county councils might have. I do not think there can be any possible objection to this Amendment, and I hope that the Minister will see his way to accept it.

Lieut.-Colonel RUGGLES-BR1SE: I beg to second the Amendment.

Colonel ASHLEY: In the first place, this Amendment, which is wide in its terms, is quite inappropriate to this place in the Bill, where we are dealing with district councils acting as agents for
the county council. Even if the Amendment were carried, it seems to me that this consultation and presence of representatives of the district councils would only apply to certain delegated functions of a very limited nature. Apart from that, however, I think my hon. and gallant Friend is wrong in saying that, because certain things have been done in other parts of the Bill, naturally it would be right to do the same here. In the case of the public assistance committees and the guardians committees which are set up under the present Bill, it is, no doubt, right and proper that the guardians committee or their representatives should be enabled to be present when the public assistance committee of the county council deals with their own local interests, in order that they may give information and that a liaison may be established between the local people and the county council. Here, however, the state of affairs is very different. Long ago in this Bill we enacted that the rural district council should cease to be a highway authority at all, and, therefore, there is no reason why all the rural district councils should have the right to attend meetings of the highways committee of the county council to put forward their case. Local members, even if not on the highway committee, will be able to inform the county council of any wishes of local inhabitants and to voice their complaints. There was no hint of such a proposal in the Onslow Commission Report and you could not give a right to the representatives of a body which has no highway authority and has nothing to do with roads, except to act as agents, to be present at meetings of the county council. I really think the Amendment is unnecessary and, indeed, unworkable.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: I am rather pleased that the right hon. Gentleman has refused the Amendment. To accept it would obviously be an injustice, particularly to urban district councils, if the chairman of a rural district council was to be permitted to be present at all the meetings. After all, now that the county councils are taking over the whole of our rural roads and will be responsible for the whole of the expenditure on them, urban district councils will be obliged, as parts of the county authority, to make a fairly large contribution, and if rural
councils were permitted to have representation on county council committees, obviously it would not only be unfair, but would be an anomaly in our local government law. I hope the right hon. Gentleman is not going to move from his present position.

Sir E. TURTON: I am very sorry for the second time to have to disagree with my hon. and gallant Friend, but it arises from the fact that he is trying to ride two horses at the same time and, as very often happens, comes a cropper at the first fence. Sometimes he is in favour of the county council and sometimes in favour of the rural district council, but on this occasion he has backed the wrong horse. It would be a most unworkable proposition that the highways committees of councils are to have attendance by representatives of practically every rural district council within the county council area, because there is no definition whatever whether they are main roads or classified or unclassified roads, and if they happen to be within the area of the district council, a representative of the district council is to be in attendance and to state his view. I think my hon. Friend should withdraw the Amendment. I put down an Amendment to the proposed Amendment to try to minimise the evil in the event of its being accepted. I hope he will not get any support in regard to my suggested Amendment. I ask him in the interests of common sense and of reasonable working to withdraw the Amendment.

Mr. KELLY: The hon. Baronet's appeal is one that must move the House, but one cannot understand, after his description of the riding of the horses and the first or second fence fall, why the Amendment appealed to him.

Sir E. TURTON: It did not appeal to me.

Mr. KELLY: The hon. Baronet accepted it providing that the representative of the rural district council should be present only during the time that special business was being discussed.

Sir E. TURTON: The hon. Member knows perfectly well the procedure of the House. In the unfortunate event of the Amendment being carried, I should have moved to insert the word "specially,"
but I pointed out clearly and emphatically that it did not mean in any sense that I was in favour of the Amendment.

Mr. KELLY: I must judge it by the Amendment to the proposed Amendment which the hon. Baronet has put on the Paper—

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER (Mr. James Hope): Is the hon. Member proposing to move the Amendment?

Mr. KELLY: No, I intend to oppose it, and I certainly hope that it will not be pressed.

Amendment negatived.

Amendment made:

In page 35, to leave out from the word "to," in line 15, to the word "by," in line 18, and insert instead thereof the words "any action to be taken."—[Colonel Ashley.]

CLAUSE 38.—(Power of county councils to act jointly with other local authorities in preparation or adoption of a town planning scheme.)

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I beg to move, in page 37, line 35, at the end, to insert the words:
(4) This Section shall extend to the County of London.

Miss LAWRENCE: This whole Clause was closured in Committee. A little later on, by a side wind, some of us managed to draw attention to the fact that the County of London was excluded and would be unable to combine with other counties. I am very glad that what we were able to say brought the Minister partially to our view of the question, but I do not think the Amendment goes nearly far enough. I remember, before the Minister of Transport was able to obtain power over main roads, the reports from the Department with regard to the construction of one of the eastern roads of London and the enumeration of all the authorities whose consent had to be obtained. If you consider the position of the County of London with regard to town planning and the multitude of local authorities, some very small, which occupy part of the circumference of London, you will see that the County Council may find it very difficult to obtain consent. It might well be that a very
good scheme of town planning, which might be agreed voluntarily by the County of London, by the Home Counties and by most of the district councils concerned, might be held up owing to the obstinacy of one, or perhaps two, councils. It is excessively desirable that not merely this Clause but all the other Clauses in the town planning section shall apply. What we want to hear from the Minister is an explanation of why the powers he holds in reserve over all other counties do not apply to the County of London. If there is a district which needs it, it is especially the County of London. Powers are possessed by the County Borough of Birmingham which are not nearly so much needed, because that borough has acquired powers over a very large hinterland. If ever there was a place which needs co-ordination it is the city in which we live and its suburbs. The Minister ought to give us some explanation why only the first Clause in the town planning section of the Bill and not the whole section is to be applied to London.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: On a point of Order. Should not the question the hon. Lady has addressed to me be raised on the next Amendment rather than on this? The next Amendment is directed to Clause 43, which says:
This part of this Act shall not extend to the County of London,
and I am proposing to move to add, "save as therein otherwise expressly provided."

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: My mind was working in that direction and was about to arrive at the same conclusion.

Mr. BENN: If the Minister decides to accede to the request of the hon. Lady, we may have to leave out Clause 43, in which case this Amendment will be quite unnecessary.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I do not think I can prejudice a discussion on the provision in this part of the Act being raised on these words in Clause 43.

Mr. BENN: If the Minister decides to apply this part of the Act to London, if we put this Amendment in now we shall not be able to go back and take it out; and the thing will be superfluous. In fact it will be absolutely misleading.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I cannot read the mind of the right hon. Gentleman, but the hon. Member and other critics of the Government will be able to express their views on the Amendment to Clause 43.

Mr. BENN: I quite agree, but does it not all show the importance of the Minister telling us what he really thinks on this Amendment instead of waiting.

Miss LAWRENCE: What opportunity should we have if we desired to omit Clause 43 altogether? We cannot do that on Report. Is not the Amendment on Clause 43 purely consequential en what we are doing now?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: No, I hardly think it is. It is true that if Clause 43 were omitted altogether this Amendment would he superfluous, but it cannot he said that an Amendment on Clause 43 is consequential upon this Amendment.

Mr. BENN: Would it be in order to move later to leave out Clause 43?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: The question can be debated on the Minister's Amendment to Clause 43.

Mr. BENN: On the Report stage Clauses are not put, and if you wish to leave out a Clause you must move to leave it out. The only remedy we have, in view of the ruling you have just given, would be to hand in an Amendment to leave out Clause 43 and, if that is a proper and orderly thing to do, no doubt my hon. Friend will do it, and on that the matter will be raised.

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I think that will be the proper course to take.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 42.—(Amendment of 15 Geo. 5. Geo. 16, s. 3.)

Mr. HARRIS: I beg to move, in page 39, line 16, to leave out the words "first day of January, nineteen hundred and thirty-nine" and to insert instead thereof the words "last day of December, nineteen hundred and thirty."
I am surprised at the great length of time that it is proposed to delay the operation of the town planning schemes. Time is the very essence of town planning. While we are waiting, towns are
growing up, almost in a night, and developments are going on in an un-organised and unintelligent way on every side, creating fresh slums. The whole purpose of the Town Planning Act is to try and prevent what has been a disgrace to the Midlands and many of our large districts. The very fact of Regulations of the kind proposed being in existence and coming into operation in a few years' time, is likely to encourage the jerry builder and the land speculator to anticipate the Regulations, in order to prevent interference with his operations. In London, we have had a great deal of opposition by private interests to many of the very splendid ideas for town planning. People plead, apparently with some reason, that they should be entitled to do what they like with their own. They do not like the interference of local authorities, and they want to turn into money, as rapidly as possible, the land in their possession. When they know that in years to come these Regulations are to come into full operation, it will be an encouragement to rapid and unsatisfactory developments.
I do not attach particular importance to the year mentioned in my Amendment. It may be that to bring the Act into operation will take a little time, but to suggest that it should be postponed until 1939 is an astounding proposal, particularly coming from the Minister of Health. I have heard the right hon. Gentleman on many occasions, even before he became a Minister, speaking of the tremendous importance of large schemes of town planning. I have heard him speak of the millennium. We are to wait for the millennium until 1939. If we are to wait until then, this Government will be a thing of the past and some of the mischief that it has done may be forgotten, but the affections for town planning cherished by the right hon. Gentleman will be associated with the year 1939. If it is a good thing to have town planning, if it is a good thing to try to prevent un-regulated development of towns and the creation of fresh slums, the sooner we allow local authorities to take effective steps, the better it will be for all concerned. It is unfortunate that the Minister should have put this very far-off date in the Bill.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I beg to second the Amendment.
I cannot see any adequate ground for the proposal which has been made by the right hon. Gentleman. As recently as 1925, less than, four years ago, this Parliament authorised the right hon. Gentleman to put into the Town Planning Act a date which was then less than four years away. When with the authority of Parliament that date was selected, the particular local authorities to which this Section referred had already had three and a half years in which to consider their schemes. Another three and a half years has gone by, and the Minister now proposes to postpone the date for the completion of the schemes. It may be that there are adequate grounds for postponing the date, but it seems to me to be quite extraordinary that three and a half years having been considered an adequate period when the Act was originally passed, and after so much time has elapsed, a further 10 years should be given before this Section of that Act is made operative.
We all realise to-day, what some of us realised 25 or more years ago, that the housing problem is not to be solved in the hearts of cities and towns by the pulling down of slums already in existence, but by seeing to it that the areas yet unbuilt upon are properly laid out and that the housing of the people in those areas takes place according to a good plan. The idea of postponing this matter for another 10 years is contrary to the interests of the public, contrary to the interests of town and country, and contrary to the health and well-being of the people. I hope that if the right hon. Gentleman is not prepared to accept the Amendment in its existing form, he will modify his own proposal and antedate by some years the date which he suggests.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): I think the House will be in general agreement with the desire which the hon. Members opposite have expressed as to the necessity of town planning and the desirability of its being put into operation wherever possible. We all regret that acts are being committed which are destroying in many respects the beauties and amenities of our country. The question which we have to consider is, how can that which
we all desire best be achieved? We are all naturally anxious to see town planning put into force more rapidly, but there is another side to the question. We have to put ourselves into the position of the local authorities. There is nothing in this Clause that can prevent any local authority from coming forward, as soon as they properly can, with a town planning scheme. The issue which we have to decide is, how soon shall we impose compulsorily upon local authorities the condition that they shall bring forward their plans. We have to consider whether by using compulsion, we shall be advancing town planning as we would desire it to be.
What I suggest to the House, and these are the reasons which have animated my right hon. Friend in making the proposal which is contained in the Clause, is that, above everything else, we want in connection with town planning good schemes rather than quick schemes. Nothing could be more undesirable than that a local authority should, under power of compulsion, bring forward hasty, ill-conceived and ill-considered schemes of town planning. Undoubtedly, it is a very complicated matter. It does take time. There are considerable complications in connection with work of this character, and the very matters which are contained in this Bill, the new conditions which we are imposing for closer co-operation between the various authorities, add to the difficulty of the situation. We have to consider that, by this Bill, we are putting upon the local authorities a great many other duties and responsibilities which they will have to face during the next few years. In these circumstances, inasmuch as this Clause does not prevent a local authority from acting more quickly if they so desire, I ask the House to adhere to the date mentioned in the Clause.

Mr. HARRIS: Will the right hon. Gentleman explain why the year 1939 has been selected? Is there any particular reason for that?

Sir K. WOOD: No, except that my right hon. Friend considers that it gives a reasonable period for the making of the necessary schemes. We realise that during the next few years local authorities will have to adapt themselves to one of the biggest changes in local government in this country for very many
years. They will have a great deal of work to do. Never in our history were local authorities entrusted with such important matters as they will be in future, and we must have regard to that fact. We are asked to make the period shorter. We think that by giving the period which we propose we are more likely to get action on reasonable schemes from local authorities. No one is more impressed with the importance of town planning than my right hon. Friend, but we must remember that during the past few years considerable progress has been made, probably more progress than has ever been made in our history in town planning, especially regional town planning. Therefore, when we are inclined to be impatient and to condemn local authorities for not making more progress, we must have regard to the considerable work which they have already done. For these reasons, we have made our proposals.

6.0 p.m.

Miss WILKINSON: The right hon. Gentleman, as usual, has expressed most excellent intentions, and then he proceeds to say "but." I have no doubt that he desires to get on with the building schemes which he tells us are so dear to his heart, but I would ask him to realise that the Government's proposal means a period of 13 years before the unwilling authorities, the backward authorities, are brought into line. That is hopelessly unreasonable, because of the development that is taking place, especially around London. We are in a time of rapidly developing arterial roads, which are being sent right into the provinces. The idea in the construction of the arterial roads was that we should promote rapid motor transport. That idea will be defeated if we are to have a long string of straggling little villas and straggling suburban towns right along the arterial roads, with children rushing over the roads, subject to the dangers of motor traffic. It is surely of the utmost importance that while these roads are being built, at the time when they are developing most rapidly, that town planning schemes should be in operation. If the Parliamentary Secretary has troubled to read the newspapers he will know that there has been a great outcry by some of the best architects against having long stretches of houses on the side of these arterial
roads. There should have been some policy by which these houses could be taken half a mile from these main roads and then linked up with it by smaller roads. The mischief will be done if this matter is left until 1939. If the right hon. Gentleman insists on this date we shall have what everybody who cares for the amenities of the country dreads, that is, arterial roads with long straggling frontage lines of mean little suburban houses. The whole idea of these main arterial roads will be absolutely lost. I suggest that this is false economy. It is not an expensive thing to have an adequate town planning scheme. The right hon. Gentleman has spoken as though we were putting an extra burden on local authorities in asking them to look ahead and have some regard for the beauty of their districts.
We are always behind the fair in this country, so far as building is concerned. Anyone who takes a motor drive along some of these arterial roads will see the perfectly miserable conditions which are growing up, not miserable in a sense that they are slums, but because they are ugly and cheap, with an utter lack of beauty and design. If you drive along the main roads in Germany you will see that they have taken the houses away from the main roads and grouped them in beautiful small villages, which are linked up by smaller roads with the main thoroughfare. Why could not that be done in England? It could be done if the right hon. Gentleman pressed the matter at all. All he says is that it is not a matter of much importance and therefore local authorities had better take eight or nine years more. The mischief will have been done then. It is extremely shortsighted on the part of the right hon. Gentleman to inflict this 10-years' limit instead of demanding that town planning should be speeded up.
Local authorities have already bad three and a-half years. Some authorities have taken advantage of the powers under the 1925 Act, but other authorities have not, and it is these backward authorities which will not do anything until the Ministry of Health comes along and says that they are a perfect nuisance and are making a mess of the land all round. I suggest that we should take bigger views. We should regard the land of this country as a heritage and suggest to these back-
ward authorities that it is about time they put town planning schemes into operation. If you leave the whole thing over for another 10 years there will be no design, no kind of co-ordination, and these areas will grow up to be an eyesore, with cheap suburban villas over a long line of roads. I think the period should be cut in half, and I do not see why the right hon. Gentleman cannot accept 1932 or 1933.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: There is one other reason why I hope the right hon. Gentleman will reconsider the whole question of town planning. As usual he has told us that this is a very moderate proposal and that he and his right hon. Friend support town planning as much as any hon. Member in any part of the House. That is about the seventeenth million time he has told us that during the Committee stage of the Bill. It is always to-day, to-morrow, sometime—and never. It is pretty obvious that 10 years hence the right hon. Gentleman will not be burdened with much responsibility. The Parliamentary Secretary has told us of the difficulties confronting local authorities and the tremendous changes which will take place in the next few years. He has spent a lot of time during the progress of this Bill in telling us of the wonderful changes which are to be beneficial and advantageous to local authorities, but now he rather suggests, for the purpose of justifying delay in the preparation of town planning schemes, that they are not going to be so beneficial and that great responsibilities will be imposed on local authorities.
May I put this point to him. In Clause 44 local authorities or county councils are obliged to undertake a general review of the whole county area and by the end of 1932 schemes have to be submitted to the Department, which will probably extend the area of some authorities and contract the area of others. It seems to me that 1933 should be the maximum period allowed local authorities to prepare town planning schemes for their respective areas. They have to undertake this review; the Minister has taken power to compel them to do so. If two authorities can be combined, with mutual advantage, they must be combined. All these things must he done compulsorily by the county autho-
rity between now and the end of 1932. In 1925 a definite date was fixed by which all local authorities should be compelled to provide a town planning scheme. Four years was given. Now the right hon. Gentleman proposes to extend that for a further period of 10 years. No justification has been given for such a long delay. While to put in 1930 might impose too large an obligation on local authorities, with all the other duties they will have to carry out, yet the fact that this review must be concluded compulsorily by the end of 1932 justifies the proposal that the right hon. Gentleman should reduce 1939 to 1933, which would be the year following the compulsory review of the area by the authority. While the one thing is being done, the other could be done at the same time, with little or no cost to the authority and with tremendous advantage to local areas throughout the length and breadth of the country.

Mr. BECKETT: It is rather astonishing to find the Government calmly proposing to put off town planning schemes, about which they told us so much in 1925, until 1939 and to find the majority in this House—who in 1925 were saying from every platform throughout the country what a Conservative Government and an excellent Minister of Health were going to do for town planning in this country—sitting on the benches opposite without uttering a single word of protest while the Parliamentary Secretary, in his own incomparable manner, administers holy-unction by the bedside of the dying building schemes of this country. I am amazed that the hon. Member for St. Albans (Lieut.-Colonel Fremantle), who has played such an honourable part in this matter, is sitting silent. I have driven through his constituency several times recently and I am sure he will not take it amiss when I say that it is a tragedy to see these districts on the outskirts of London being completely neglected from the aesthetic point of view in the matter of town planning schemes.
It is not only a matter of keeping houses off the new main roads, it is a question of preventing those appalling rows after rows of detached or semidetached houses built on exactly the same lines. They may be quite a good artistic design for a small detached house, but
when they are reproduced 10, 20 and 100 times along a long stretch of road, mile after mile, they are very non-aesthetic. Unless architects, builders and municipal authorities should be encouraged to pool designs, because it is quite impossible for any one landowner or builder to pay for 30 or 40 different architects' designs. It would be a simple matter for a local authority, which is controlling town planning on a considerable scale, to get an exchange of designs and avoid the terrible dull drabness and sameness which is to be seen everywhere at the present moment. The Minister of Health has taken no interest in this Debate and the Parliamentary Secretary, instead of being his usual bright and irresponsible self, has been very halting and was wholly unable to give us any reasons why the Government refuse to accept this Amendment, except the amazing reason, which I think the House and the country should know, that local authorities will be so busy for so many years adapting themselves to the changes of this Bill that it will be quite impossible for them to consider town planning schemes under a period of 10 years.
I have heard some very hard things said about the Bill from this side of the House, but I do not think any of us has condemned the Bill quite as efficiently as the Parliamentary Secretary himself did when he said that it would confuse the local authorities to such an extent that it was hopeless to expect any town planning from them for 10 years. I really think that the Parliamentary Secretary has exceeded even his own audacities in Debate. Unless the Amendment in some form is accepted, there is an end of any hope that hon. Gentlemen opposite may have of persuading the country that they have any interest at all in the matter. As has been said, at the end of 10 years the mischief will have been done. The country will be drab and ugly and mean, and one of the worst condemnations of this Government's action will then be that at the moment when the whole country was suiting itself to the new conditions of traffic and transport the Government allowed this matter to go by default, and, for the sake of a little negotiation and tactfulness in the handling of local authorities, allowed the countryside to become the kind of thing that it will be then.

Mr. W. BENNETT: I regret very much that Sir Herbert Samuel is not present to see the interesting events that are taking place on the Liberal benches to my left. As to the putting off town planning, the Parliamentary Secretary spoke of difficulties, but it seems to me that every year that elapses makes it more difficult to bring in town planning schemes. It may be that there are difficulties in shortening the length of a period, but there are greater difficulties in lengthening it. Every year that passes makes it more difficult to bring in the things that are wanted. I have in mind such things as playing fields for children, air spaces and so forth. If you allow 10 years to pass, each year some fresh difficulty, some fresh vested interest is established that is more difficult for the local authorities to cope with. We have seen that in the delay that has already taken place. I cannot understand why there is this objection to putting town planning schemes on paper. I sometimes fancy that it must be vested interests in the ground around the towns are very anxious to get their little schemes put into operation, and to have congested areas established before a town planning scheme is adopted. Like the last speaker I am astonished that all the objections to this Clause have come from this side of the House, for there are many people opposite who, I am sure, are perfectly sincere in their desire to see town planning promptly carried out. Why are they afraid, why do they not make some protest? Ten years is much too long a time to allow. Sufficient time has passed already and recalcitrant local authorities should be requested to make their plans immediately.

Mr. WALLHEAD: I would like to congratulate my hon. Friend on the excellent contribution which he has made to our discussion, and I am sure that I echo the opinions both of political friends and opponents in saying that we hope this is not the last occasion on which he will take part in the Debates of the House. The Parliamentary Secretary's explanation or excuse for not accepting the Amendment is about the lamest that I have heard. He showed, as usual, a certain amount of dexterity and ingenuity—on which I should be the first to compliment him—in meeting the difficulties of Debate, but on this occasion I
think he lamentably failed in his reply. I should have thought that the Ministry of Health might, at least, have taken unto themselves powers to enforce the laws that already exist. Surely, instead of extending the time, it would be far better to limit it to a greater extent than now. Three-and-a-half years have passed and many councils still refuse to adopt town planning schemes. The Amendment asks that another two years shall be given to them, and surely that is long enough.
The Ministry of Health is convinced of the necessity. There are few people in the House who would defend the delays that are taking place in the adoption of town planning. The country is spending a very large amount of money upon arterial roads, which are being laid down because of the development of certain types of traffic. We are insisting that those roads shall be of a, certain width, for the free passage of slow-moving and fast-moving vehicles. Yet at the same time, in certain areas contingent upon large towns, we are permitting the building of ribbon houses, very often small houses with small garages attached. Presumably, the householders are to own small motor-cars. The longer the ribbon the more vehicular traffic will be stopping outside these houses, and if you get vehicles continually stopping outside houses on both sides of the new arterial roads you narrow down your arterial roads seriously, and defeat your own object so far as rapid transit is concerned. Reference has been made to the constituency of St. Albans. I have not lived in Hertfordshire long. When I went

there first it was a pleasant ride from my home to St. Albans. Now it has become a nightmare and an atrocity. The whole place is built up from end to end with nothing but a string of unaesthetic little bungalows, which are a positive eyesore.

For aestheticism hon. Members opposite usually claim greater appreciation than we are supposed to have on this side of the House. One would have thought that they would have done something on this Bill at least to establish that claim. All architects, the greatest in the land, are in a state of perfect horror at the possibilities of the future in connection with the new arterial roads. For the sake of generations to come the House ought to restrict as far as possible the operations of the jerry-builder and the land speculator. The beauty of the land ought to be preserved. I am much interested in the development of garden cities, but what is the use if one has continual rows of ugliness leading up to each garden city? The Government are making a very great mistake. It is not a question of economics at all. I love the country, and I think that the Government ought to pay some attention to what is being done with our beautiful roads and lanes and the approaches to our towns and villages. The Government ought to take their courage in their hands and compel local authorities to do their part.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 218; Noes, 129.

Division No. 197.]
AYES.
[6.29 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips


Albery, Irving James
Briggs, J. Harold
Cooper, A. Duff


Alexander, Sir Win. (Glasgow, Centr'l)
Briscoe, Richard George
Cope, Major Sir William


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Brittain, Sir Harry
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks,Newb'y)
Craig, Sir Ernest (Chester, Crewe)


Apsley, Lord
Buchan, John
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Buckingham, Sir H.
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)


Atkinson, C.
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsay, Gainsbro)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Burman, J. B.
Dalkeith, Earl of


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Burton, Colonel H. W.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Campbell, E. T.
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Carver, Major W. H.
Davies, Dr. Vernon


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Cassels, J. D.
Dawson, Sir Philip


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Eden, Captain Anthony


Berry, Sir George
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Ox, Univ.)
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Bethel, A.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A. (Birm., W.)
Elliot, Major Walter E.


Betterton, Henry B.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Ellis, R. G.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Charteris, Brigadier-General J,
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)


Blundell, F. N.
Clarry, Reginald George
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Cobb, Sir CyrN
Everard, W. Lindsay


Brass, Captain W.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A D.
Fairfax, Captain J. G.


Fall, Sir Bertram G.
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Ruggies-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Rye, F. G.


Fielden, E. B.
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Salmon, Major I.


Faster, Sir Harry S.
Loder, J. de V.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Fraser, Captain Ian
Looker, Herbert William
Sandeman, N. Stewart


Frece, Sir Walter de
Lougher, Lewis
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vera
Sandon, Lord


Ganzoni, Sir John
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Herman
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Gates, Percy
Lumley, L. R.
Savery, S. S.


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen
Shepperson, E. W.


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Maclntyre, Ian
Skelton, A. N.


Goff, Sir Park
McLean, Major A.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dlne, C.)


Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Greaves-Lord, Sir Walter
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Smithers, Waldron


Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th'e'w, E)
Margesson, Captain D.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Marrlott, Sir J. A. R.
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.


Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Mailer, R. J.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Grotrian, H. Brent
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Storry-Deans, R.


Gulnness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Meyer, Sir Frank
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Hamilton, Sir George
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Hammersley, S. S.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatbam)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Hanbury, C.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Moore, Lieut.-Coionel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Harland, A.
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell


Headlam, Lieut-Colonel C. M.
Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Henderson, Capt. R. R, (Oxf'd, Henley)
Nelson, Sir Frank
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian
Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Hills, Major John Waller
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Hilton, Cecil
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G,
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsl'ld.)
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Lutoa)
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Hopkins, J. W. W.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Watts, Sir Thomas


Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Wells, S. R.


Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Penny, Frederick George
Williams, A. M. (Cornwall, Northern)


Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Power, sir John Cecil
Windsor-Clive, Lleut.-Colonel George


Hudson, Capt, A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Pownall, Sir Assheton
Withers, John James


Hume, Sir G. H.
Ralne, Sir Walter
Womersley, W. J.


Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer
Ramsden, E.
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Hurd, Percy A.
Raid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Hurst, Gerald B.
Reid, D. D. (County Down)
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Rentoul, G. S.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Iveagh, Countess of
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Worthington- Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Jackson, sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ts'y)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)



Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


King, Commodore Henry Douglas
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Captain Bowyer and Major the


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Ropner, Major L.
 Marquess of Titchfield


Knox, Sir Alfred
Rots, R. D.



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Day, Harry
Hollins, A.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff. Cannock)
Dennison, R.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Duckworth, John
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Ammon, Charles George
Duncan, C.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Dunnico, H.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Edge, Sir William
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Barnes, A.
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrington)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)


Barr, J.
England, Colonel A.
Kelly, W. T.


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Kennedy, T.


Bellamy, A.
George, Rt. Hon. David Lloyd
Kirkwood, D.


Benn, Wedgwood
Gibbins, Joseph
Lawrence, Susan


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Gillett, George M.
Lawson, John James


Bondfield, Margaret
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Longbottom, A. W.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Greenall, T.
Lowth, T.


Bromfield, William
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Lunn, William


Bromley, J.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Mackinder, W.


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
Griffith, F. Kingsley
MacLaren, Andrew


Buchanan, G.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypoof)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow. Govan)


Buxton. Rt. Hon. Noel
Groves, T.
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)


Cape, Thomas
Grundy, T. W.
March, S.


Charleton, H. C
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Maxton James


Clarke, A. B.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvll)
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Morris, R. H.


Collins. Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Hardle, George D.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Compton, Joseph
Harris, Percy A.
Mosley, Sir Oswald


Connolly, M.
Hayday, Arthur
Oliver, George Harold


Cove, W. G.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Palln, John Henry


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Hirst. G. H.
Paling, W.


Dalton, Hugh
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)




Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Wallhead, Richard C.


Ponsonby, Arthur
Stamford, T. W.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Potts, John S.
Stephen, Campbell
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Purcell, A. A.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Sullivan, Joseph
Wellock, Wilfred


Ritson, J.
Taylor, R. A.
Welsh, J. C.


Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Saklatvala, Shapurji
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Whiteley, W.


Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Shinwell, E.
Thurtle, Ernest
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Tinker, John Joseph
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Sitch, Charles H.
Tomlinson, R. P.
Wright, W.


Slesser, Sir Henry H.
Townend, A. E.



Smith, Rennie (Penlstone)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Snell, Harry
Viant, S. P.
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Hayes.

CLAUSE 43.—(Extent of Part 111.)

Miss LAWRENCE: I beg to move, to leave out the Clause.
This Clause provides that this part of the Act shall not extend to the county of London, except Clause 38 in which the Minister has already included London. We desire some explanation from the Minister as to why Clauses 39 and 40 should not apply to London. Anyone who is acquainted with the way in which London is extending into the country knows that to-day in the North it goes up nearly to Hendon, while in the West it runs nearly to Hayes and Southall. To the South and East one can go through continuous streets of houses for long distances. That process is going on every year. We see all around residential properties, some of them quite charming, springing up on the outskirts of London, but anybody who considers the matter must realise how very much it is to be regretted that when the older London, as we know it, was being built, there was no authority in power to preserve open spaces. We have open spaces in London but there are whole districts—from Islington for example almost up to Finsbury Park, and in some parts of South London—where we find nothing but streets upon streets of houses. We must realise how we wasted our opportunities when the older London was being built and how very much more agreeable a place it would be to-day, if these amenities had been preserved. Anybody so considering the matter must wish that something of that kind could be done in regard to the newer London which is being built.
The chief thing to be desired is that before the houses are built we should preserve certain quite large spaces, as green open spaces, not necessarily parks, but market gardens and so forth, so as to retain something of the country in these districts where building is proceeding.
Desirable as this object is, London presents what is perhaps the most difficult problem in connection with town planning in England and Wales. It is not that the London County Council does not desire it. It is not that the London County Council has not already, by means of a voluntary committee, made efforts in that direction. It is on account of the multiplicity of local authorities which surround London. There are the counties, there are the urban districts, there are the rural districts whose consent would have to be obtained before a scheme of town planning, anything like commensurate with the needs of the case, could be undertaken. At present, under this Measure, while you may have a voluntary scheme, with all the councils joined together in it, in practice you may find—you will quite likely find—same small and even insignificant rural council standing in the way of any well-thoughtout and comprehensive scheme. We know what has happened already. The incursion of the London County Council Housing Committee into Essex has in itself produced a whole crop of difficulties, and those difficulties, though acute with building authorities, are even more acute with regard to the unco-ordinated mass of private estates and private building schemes, all developing land around London without the slightest regard for London as a whole.
Clause 39 gives the Minister powers of compulsion. I fully agree that, with regard to the major authorities, such powers are not at all likely to be exercised, but that the Minister should keep such powers in reserve seems to be highly desirable. All we are asking is that the Minister should have power to exercise his discretion and to combine authorities where combination appears to be desirable, and where some perhaps not very considerable authority is standing in the way of a scheme. Clause 40 gives power
to constitute the county council the responsible authority. That does not really apply to London, but would apply to any combination of councils which might take place. It is Clause 39 which is the main point, and Clause 39, I think, should be applied to London. The Minister in any case should have these powers of compulsion in reserve to enforce them if necessary. I have been obliged to recapitulate very shortly a speech which I made on a previous occasion because, though I was allowed to make that speech, it turned out ultimately that it was not in order. I apologise for having had to do so, and I now ask the Minister why he will not apply the whole of this town planning part of the Measure to the place which needs it most, namely, London and the Home Counties.

Mr. HARRIS: I beg to second the Amendment.
I am particularly glad that this Amendment has been moved by the hon. Member for East Ham North (Miss Lawrence). No person could do so more appropriately because, for a quarter of a century, the hon. Member has been actively associated with the government of London, and she now represents one of the outlying constituencies of London which would be materially affected if these proposals were applied to London. I am rather surprised that the right hon. Gentleman should have gone out of his way to exclude London. I cannot but remember that he was a member for a considerable time—not all the time—of the Royal Commission on the problem of Greater London, and he, therefore, had exceptional opportunities to realise the difficulties in London, because the urban areas extend for many miles outside the county boundaries. Rightly or wrongly, the Royal Commission turned down the suggestion of the London County Council that there should be a Greater London, and they deliberately decided that the area should continue to be inside the present county boundaries, so that all our problems of town planning, of making new roads, or of providing open spaces are complicated by the limits fixed. It seems, therefore, essential that London, above all places in the country, should have the provisions of these particular Clauses applied to it.
We are constantly embarrassed in London in dealing with our housing question. The bulk of our houses are being built outside the county, and the Minister knows very well that, if you are going to have a satisfactory housing estate, the provision of open spaces, parks, and gardens, and the proper lay-out of streets are essential, and they are constantly being held up by friction with the outer authorities. It is well known that we have had difficulties with the county of Essex and difficulties, though very much less, with the county of Surrey, and you will not get a, satisfactory settlement of these problems until the Minister can come down and compel local authorities to come together and co-operate. We in London have been embarrassed by the multiplicity of local authorities, by having 28 borough councils in London, but we have been even more embarrassed when we have started to plan roads that are going to end somewhere many miles out, because we are immediately faced by the fact that we cannot get the co-operation of the adjoining counties.
I am not attacking them. I recognise that they are very effective local authorities, but, human nature being what it is, it is difficult to avoid jealousies and suspicions and to bring about co-operation; and I should have thought the Minister, with his knowledge of Birmingham, where they have had to face similar problems and to deal with the expansion of Birmingham in order to get over those problems, would have been the first to recognise that if it is necessary to put Clauses of this kind in this Bill, the one place above all to which they should apply was London itself. I do not know why he put in these words. I am sure they were not put in at the request of the London County Council, and I do not know that they were put in at the request of the City Corporation. Who is responsible? Are they the invention of his own imagination, ingenuity, or his own officials? If not, what local authority has suggested that London should be deprived of the advantages of these various Clauses? I think the Minister ought to bring forward a very strong argument for putting this particular Clause through the House if we are going to accept it, and unless he does, I hope the hon. Lady will press her Amendment to a Division.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I have listened with careful attention to the speeches of the hon. Member for East Ham, North (Miss Lawrence) and the hon. Member for South West Bethnal Green (Mr. Harris), because I was very anxious to find from those speeches what precisely it was that the hon. Members thought would be obtained by leaving out Clause 43. Perhaps I may, in the first instance, answer the series of somewhat rhetorical questions put by the hon. Member for South West Bethnal Green, who is, I think, and has been for many years, a member of the London County Council. He wanted to know whether this Clause was my own invention, from whose brain it emanated, what possible local authority could have made any request for such a Clause. I am sorry that he does not know more about the affairs of the local authority of which he is such a distinguished ornament, because I may inform him—he evidently does not know—that these words were inserted at the request of the London County Council. If I understood the hon. Member for East Ham North correctly, the situation which she had in mind was one where it was desirable that joint town planning should be made by the London County Council and a number of local authorities outside the area of the county council, and where most of those authorities were agreeable to join in, but one particular authority stood out. Am I correct in thinking that that was the difficulty which she foresaw?

Miss LAWRENCE: It was a disagreement between London and any of the neighbouring authorities.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: A disagreement about what? Whether or not they should make a plan? What does Clause 39 do? It gives the Minister power to compel a combination between local authorities in making a joint town planning scheme, and the point that was put, as I understand, by the hon. Lady was that if you took London out, you could not make any combination, or the Minister could not insist on any combination, between London and the outlying authorities. But the London County Council is well known to be a very progressive town planning authority, and quite ready, and indeed anxious, to take part in joint town planning schemes with the outlying authorities. If there be any difficulty then, it.
cannot lie with London, and it must only lie with one of the outside authorities. Surely the hon. Member has not quite appreciated the force of Clause 39. If there is a difficulty with the outside authorities, Clause 39 gives the Minister power to deal with it.

Miss LAWRENCE: London may wish to do it, but Kent and Sussex may refuse. You have power to combine Kent and Sussex, but not to combine either of them with London.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Yes. Under Clause 39, if London is willing to cooperate, the Minister can make the outlying authorities co-operate with London. You would not alter that by putting London into the Clause. The Clause applies to the outside authorities, and it is with them alone that any difficulty can arise. What the London County Council said was, "There is no difficulty as far as we are concerned; we are only too ready to combine with other authorities," and they desired to be taken out of the Clause. I agree that, as far as Clause 38 is concerned, that is a different matter. It is desirable that London should be brought into Clause 38, but there is nothing to be gained by leaving out Clause 43 which is not already in the power given to the Minister in Clause 39.

Miss LAWRENCE: Clause 39 says that where it appears expedient that two or more local authorities, not including London, should combine, and so on. How can that cover the case of a combination including London? It is a question, obviously, of words.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: If the hon. Member will read the words more carefully, she will see that it does not merely say "should be combined," but
should be combined for purposes connected with the preparation or adoption of a town planning scheme.
In this particular case it would be the preparation or adoption of a town planning scheme in which the London County Council was concerned, and, therefore, those words give the Minister the power of compelling this combination between the outside authorities and the London County Council.

Miss LAWRENCE: Is there any way in which one can have an authoritative
ruling? If the explanation given by the Minister is correct, Clause 43 is absolutely needless, and the right hon. Gentleman should accept my Amendment. According to what the Minister said, this Clause means nothing, for in spite of Clause 43, Clause 39 will enable him to combine London with another county. If that is the correct view, is not Clause 43 entirely unnecessary?

Mr. SIDNEY WEBB: We want to be very sure that the words used hear the meaning which the Minister puts upon them. The Minister suggested that no difficulties will arise from the wording of Clause 43 because ex hypothesi the London County Council will always be a willing partner, and, therefore, if he has power to coerce the other people, the object will be attained. That does not seem to be quite so clear to us as he seems to think, because the power which he will have will be to make an Order, which Order will not only say, "You shall combine," but will necessarily go on to say, "You shall combine for this or that particular purpose, or in this or the other way." It does not follow that, because the London County Council is willing generally to enter into a combination, the London County Council—such is the perverseness of human nature, even in the London County Council—will be willing to enter into precisely the combination and under precisely the conditions that Surrey and Kent, or whatever the other parties may be, wish to impose. Consequently, unless the Minister has complete power of coercion over all the partners, he is putting the London County Council in the position of either having to agree with the terms which the other people want, or of not entering the combination at all.
7.0 p.m.
Surely, if he is going to have authority to compel a combination to make a town plan, and all the consequent details of that plan, it is not sufficient to say that you may assume that the London County Council will be agreeable to it. The London County Council may be agreeable in general terms, but you do not want to put them into the position of making them agree to the precise details that the other parties want. It seems a little difficult to believe that the Minister can have power to sanction a particular combination when the Act is not to apply to one of the parties to that combination.
I cannot understand; it is a matter or metaphysics. The combination which has to be sanctioned is not an entity in itself, quite apart from its constituent bodies, and if the Minister thinks, by virtue of the Clause which says that these powers shall not apply to London, which is one of the constituent bodies, that nevertheless he can make a combination containing that particular body, it is rather a contradiction in terms. He would actually be applying this power to the London County Council if he sanctions or orders the combination. If the Minister makes an Order directing that Kent and Surrey shall combine with the London County Council, he is exercising power over the London County Council. The mere fact that the London County Council may be willing does not affect the question. If the right hon. Gentleman, for instance, in due course is offered a peerage by His Majesty the King, he will be made a peer, willy nilly, and power will be exercised over him to that extent. The mere fact that he agrees to accept the peerage does not affect the power exercised over him to make him a Member of the other place submit, as a matter of metaphysical accuracy, that it will not be possible under these words for the Minister to direct a combination to be made consisting of members to one of whose areas his power will not apply at all. I do not think that that difficulty is affected by the question whether one member of the constituent bodies may be willing that the power shall be exercised. It is the exercise of the power which is important and, whether it is exercised upon a willing or an unwilling constituent, does not appear to me to cause any difference. This is a question of legal construction, and it seems to me that the Minister is running the risk of not being able to exercise the power which he says he is to exercise.

Mr. BENN: The Minister has agreed with us that it is desirable that these combinations should take place. He says it is unnecessary to accept the Amendment because of certain facts. We are all at one as to the desirability of combinations taking place. He says that the county council has asked for it. Since when has he begun to draft a Bill in accordance with the wishes of local
authorities? The Bill is largely a frustration of the wishes of local authorities. To say that a county council has desired this, is not a particularly cogent reason coming from the lips of this particular Minister. As I understand the situation, the Minister says he agrees that it may be desirable that London should agree with certain adjacent counties for the purpose of town planning schemes, but that it is not necessary to take power over London, because he already has power to compel the other adjacent authorities, and he knows London to be willing. Supposing that he makes an Order over two other counties and London, and that the other counties object to it on the ground that he has no power over London. Heaven forbid that a layman should interpret an Act of Parliament, but this is what the Bill says:
Where it appears to the Minister that it is expedient that two or more local authorities (including county councils)

should be combined for purposes connected with the preparation or adoption of a town planning scheme, it shall he lawful for the Minister, by Order, to provide for the constitution of a joint committee for the purpose."

Yet, in Clause 43, he says that it shall not apply where London is concerned. He says then to Kent and Surrey that he proposes to make a compulsory scheme with London as the third and willing partner. Kent and Surrey will reply that, if he reads Clause 39, he will find that he has no power over London, and therefore the joint scheme cannot be made. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will consider this, especially as there is no disagreement on the object we all have at heart.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out, to the word shall, in line 18, stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 216; Noes, 127.

Division No. 198.]
AYES.
[7.5 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cope, Major Sir William
Harland, A.


Albery, Irving James
Couper, J. B.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Henderson. Capt. R. R. (Oxt'd, Henley)


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. Sir Vivian


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Craig, Sir Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Crooke. J. Smedley (Derltend)
Hills, Major John Waller


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Hilton, Cecil


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Davis, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Davis, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Hopkinson, Sir A. (Eng. Universities)


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Davis, Dr. Vernon
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mostley)


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Dawson, Sir Philip
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.


Berry, Sir George
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.


Bethel, A.
Eden, Captain Anthony
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.


Betterton, Henry B.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Edwards, J. Hugh (Accrlngton)
Hume, Sir G. H.


Blundell, F. N.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Hunter-Weston, Lt.-Gen. Sir Aylmer


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Ellis, R. G.
Hurst, Gerald B.


Brass, Captain W.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Iveagh, Countess of


Briggs, J. Harold
Everard, W. Lindsay
Jackson, sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Briscoe, Richard George
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert


Brittain, Sir Harry
Falle, Sir Bertram G
Jones, Sir G. W, H. (Stoke New'gton}


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Fanshawe, Captain G. D.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Fielden, E. B.
King, Commodore Henry Douglas


Buckingham, Sir H.
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Kinoch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Fraser, Captain Ian
Knox, Sir Alfred


Burman, J. B.
Frece, Sir Walter de
Lamb, J. Q.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Campbell, E. T.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Carver, Major W. H.
Gates, Percy
Loder, J. de V.


Cassels, J. D.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Looker, Herbert William


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Lougher, Lewis


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Goff, Sir Park
Lucas-Tooth, Sir Hugh Vere


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Ox. Univ.)
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J. A (Blrm., W.)
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E)
Lumley, L. R.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
MacAndrew, Major Charles Glen


Chapman, Sir S
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
MacDonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Chartaris, Brigadier-General J.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Maclntyre, Ian


Clarry, Reginald George
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
McLean, Major A.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Macmillan, Captain H.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Macquisten, F. A.


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Hammersley, S. S.
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hanbury, C.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Cooper, A. Duff
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Margeston, Captain D.


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Meller, R. J.
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'ti'y)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Meyer, Sir Frank
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Hereford)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Redd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Ropner, Major L.
Tinne, J. A.


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Ross, R. D.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Moreing, Captain A. H.
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Turton, Sir Edmund Russborough


Nail, Colonel Sir Joseph
Rye. F. G.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Nelson, Sir Frank
Salmon, Major I.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Neville, Sir Reginald J.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Sandeman, N. Stewart
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Sanders, Sir Robert A,
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Watts, Sir Thomas


Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hon. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)
Sandon, Lord
Wells, S. R.


O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustavo D.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Shepperson, E. W.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Skelton, A. N.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Penny, Frederick George
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dlne, C.)
Withers, John James


Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Womersley, W. J.


Power, Sir John Cecil
Smithers, Waldron
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Pownall, Sir Assheton
Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Price, Major C. W. M.
Stanley, Lieut.-Colonel Rt. Hon. G. F.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Ralne, Sir Walter
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton (Norwich)


Ramsden, E.
Storry-Denos, R.



Reid, Capt. Cunningham (Warrington)
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Reid, D. D. (County Down)
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.
Captain Bowyer and Major the




Marquess of Titchfield.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fits, West)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Adamson, W. M, (Staff., Cannock)
Groves, T.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Grundy, T. W.
Ritson, J.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Runciman, Hilda (Cornwall, St. Ives)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvll)
Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter


Barr, J.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Sakiatvala, Shapurji


Beckett. John (Gateshead)
Hardle, George D.
Scrymgeour, E.


Bellamy, A.
Harris, Percy A.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Benn, Wedgwood
Hayday, Arthur
Shinwell, E.


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Hirst, G. H.
Sitch, Charles H.


Bromfield, William
Hollins, A.
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Bromley, J.
Jenkins, W, (Glamorgan, Neath)
Smith, Rennle (Penlstone)


Brown, James (Ayr and Bute)
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Snell, Harry


Buchanan, G.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Buxton, Rt. Hon. Noel
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Stamford, T. W.


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Stephen, Campbell


Clarke, A. B.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Kelly, W. T.
Strauss, E. A.


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Kennedy, T.
Sullivan, Joseph


Compton, Joseph
Kirkwood, D.
Taylor, R. A.


Connolly, M.
Lawrence, Susan
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Cove, W. G.
Longbottom, A. W.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Lowth, T.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Lunn, William
Thurtle, Ernest


Day, Harry
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Tinker, John Joseph


Dennison, R.
Mackinder, W.
Tomilnson, R. P.


Duckworth, John
MacLaren, Andrew
Townend, A. E.


Duncan, C.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Viant, S. P.


Dunnico, H.
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
March, S.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


England, Colonel A.
Maxton, James
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Forrest, W.
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Joslah


Gardner, J. P.
Morris, R. H.
Wellock, Wilfred


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Welsh, J. C.


George, Rt. Hon. David Lloyd
Mosley, Sir Oswald
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Gibbins, Joseph
Oliver, George Harold
Whiteley, W.


Gillett, George M.
Palln, John Henry
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Graham. D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Paling, W.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Greenall, T.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wlgan)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W
Wright, W.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Ponsonby, Arthur



Griffith, F. Kingsley
Potts, John S.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. Hayes and Mr. A. Barnes.

Amendment made:

In page 39, line 18, at the beginning, insert the words, "save as therein otherwise expressly provided."—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

CLAUSE 44.—(First general review of districts by county councils.)

Mr. RENNIE SMITH: I beg to move, in page 40, to leave out lines 8 to 13.
The effect of this Clause is to add to the powers of the county boroughs and county councils with regard to the modification of existing county districts. It brings in county boroughs for, as far as I know, the first time in the history of local government with powers over the boundaries of urban and rural districts; and it obliges the county council to consult the county boroughs with regard to county areas. It is from the point of view of protecting the lesser authorities that I have moved this Amendment. The Minister will agree that the power which the county boroughs already possess, either of promoting a Bill or of using the method of a provisional order, are quite sufficient to meet all reasonable purposes. The power given in this Clause will bring confusion between the county borough and the county councils, and will put the lesser authorities very much under the control of the county boroughs. The effect of my Amendment would be to leave the powers of the county boroughs where they are, and safeguard the existing powers of the county council; above all it would offer a certain element of protection to the urban and rural districts, which would seem to be left off the map in the plans of the Minister.

Mr. W. THORNE: I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The hon. Member has given an extraordinary account of the effect of this Clause. What induces him to say that the urban and rural districts are left off the map in this proposal I cannot imagine, because if he reads the subsequent Sub-section he will see that they are given specific powers to make representations, and the county council have to send to everyone of them a copy of their proposals at the time that they are submitted to the Minister. He also went on to speak of the powers of the county boroughs. This Clause does not provide the county boroughs with powers. It provides that the county councils, before making any proposals, shall consult with the county boroughs, and that the Minister shall give them an opportunity of laying before him their views on the proposal. Surely the hon. Member does not pretend that the county boroughs have no interest in the rearrangement of county districts proposed by the county council.
If it be once granted that this is a matter of interest to the county boroughs, it will be agreed that it is only prudent that at the earliest opportunity the county should make itself acquainted with what are the views of the county boroughs. Nothing in the Clause says that the county councils must adopt the views of the county boroughs. All it says is that the county council must ascertain their views, and that then the county boroughs will have an opportunity of making their representations to the Minister. I would remind the hon. Member, as he stresses the point, that the Royal Commission made this very recommendation. They said:
It should be the duty of the county council, before making representations to the Minister, to consult the councils of the county boroughs within the geographical county, and the county boroughs should have an opportunity of laying before the Minister their views upon the proposals of the county council.
All classes of local authorities were represented on that Royal Commission, and they were unanimous in this recommendation. What we have done is to follow out that recommendation, and in doing so we are only acting in the interest of the various local authorities concerned.

Mr. GREENWOOD: The real point of this Amendment is that the treatment to be accorded to the county boroughs is different from the treatment to be accorded to the minor local authorities who are more especially affected. It is true that they may make representations and that the county council has to inform them of its decision, but making representations and having consultations need not mean the same thing. It would appear that the local authorities are rather slighted. The county boroughs, being large and important, are to be brought into consultation, which means that they are to meet the county councils face to face, and their power is such that their influence would be considerable on the county council. Urban and rural districts, however, may make representations, and all that follows is that the county council is to inform them of its proposals. That seems to be treating the minor local authorities with less courtesy than they deserve. I am not against consultations between the county councils and the county boroughs be-
cause, as the right hon. Gentleman said, the county boroughs are obviously affected, but the minor local authorities are equally affected. Indeed, their interest is perhaps greater than that of the county boroughs, and one would have thought that they would all have been put on the same footing. There should rather have been a round table conference and the same opportunities of consultation afforded to the minor authorities as to the county boroughs. It is clear that making representations and having consultations mean different things. If they do not, I do not see any reason why the words should be in. I think, therefore, that my hon. Friend is justified in raising this point, and I hardly think that the Minister has met his difficulty.

Mr. LOOKER: I have been in close touch with these authorities, and, as far as I know, they have no complaint to make about the provisions of this particular part of the Bill. Before a county council makes any proposal, they must have a conference with the councils of the districts concerned, at which the councils will have an opportunity of putting forward their views. They are quite satisfied that the county council will give due consideration to their representations. Suppose that in the end they are not satisfied with the proposals; they have an opportunity of seeing the proposals as soon as they are made, and, if they are dissatisfied, they may at once make representations to the Minister, upon whose judgment they are quite content to rely to see that their interests are protected. I can assure the hon. Gentleman who moved the Amendment that if they had any grievance in respect of this provision, they would undoubtedly have put forward some Amendments, but this they have not thought it necessary to do.

Amendment negatived.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I beg to move, in page 40, line 16, after the first word "of," to insert the words "another district or."
The purpose of this Amendment is to correct a slight error in the drafting, because it may be desirable that the proposal should include the transfer of the
whole of an urban district as well as part of an urban district.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I beg to move, in page 41, line 1, after the word "if," to insert the words
either on representations made by a district council or otherwise.

Mr. MARDY JONES: What is the meaning of the word "otherwise"? Does it mean that any interested body of persons can raise a point in addition to a district council?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: We are not changing the words in the Clause, but merely the order of the words.

Mr. JONES: I understand that, but I wish to be clear as to the meaning of the word "otherwise" Does that mean that any body of ratepayers or interested body of persons in the county can make representations as well as the district councils?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Yes, certainly.

Mr. BENN: I notice that in Subsection (7) it is provided that an Order shall be laid before Parliament. Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us the Parliamentary value of that?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Is that relevant to this Amendment?

Mr. BENN: If you are altering boundaries; and the Minister has to make—

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: We are not altering boundaries, but merely the order of certain words at the beginning of Subsection (5).

Mr. BENN: The Minister is trying to shelter himself behind a point of Order. Whatever his intention, he is moving certain words, and one of the subsequent provisions of those words concerns Orders, and I am asking him the value which the laying of these Orders has, when it is made in accordance with Subsection (7).

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not really understand at what the hon. Member is driving. What the laying of the Order before Parliament has to do with the alteration of the order of words in Subsection (5), I fail to see.

Mr. BENN: It seemed to me a means of saving time to ask the Minister, instead of moving a separate Amendment, inasmuch as it is germane to the subject, what Parliamentary control is conferred by this power of laying an Order on the Table?

Sir HENRY SLESSER: It is much more ungrammatical to put in a conditional phrase in the middle of another conditional phrase than to leave the words as they are. It is better to say, "If it appears to the Minister either on the representation than "If either on representations it appears to the Minister."

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I am acting upon the advice of the Parliamentary draftsman. In answer to the hon. Member for North Aberdeen (Mr. Benn), he will find this procedure with regard to Orders in Clause 119.

Mr. BENN: They are nut covered by Clause 119 at all. This Sub-section (7) is a complete farce, because the Minister lays an Order and nothing occurs.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: It will be a matter for Parliament.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made:

In page 41, leave out from the word "Minister" in line 1, to the word "after" in line 2.—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

CLAUSE 46.—(Saving of powers under and Amendments of s. 57 of 51 and 52 Viet. c. 41.)

Amendment made:

In page 43, line 4, leave out the word "apply," and insert instead thereof the word "extend."—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

CLAUSE 48.—(Review by county councils of electoral divisions.)

Amendments made:

In page 44, line 11, after the word "If," insert the words:
either on representations made by a local authority or otherwise.

In page 44, leave out from the word "State" in line 11, to the word "after" in line 13.—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

It being half-past Seven of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER proceeded, pursuant to the Order of the House of 12th December, successively to put forthwith the
Questions on any Amendments moved by the Government of which notice had been given to that part of the Bill to be concluded at half-past Seven of the Clock at this day's Sitting.

CLAUSE 54.—(Qualifications of certain medical officers and health visitors.)

Amendments made:

In page 48, line 26, after the word "Acts," insert the words "1875 to 1926, and the Public Health (London) Act, 1891."

In line 29, leave out the word "apply," and insert instead thereof the word "extend."—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

CLAUSE 58.—(Provision of hospital accommodation for infectious disease.)

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I beg to move, in page 51, line 31, at the end, to insert the words:
and
(b) the expression 'infectious disease' shall not include tuberculosis or venereal disease.
This Amendment is necessary because tuberculosis and venereal disease are already covered by the scheme.

Mr. SPEAKER: Order, order! It is after half-past Seven o'clock, and there can be no discussion.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 60.—(Provisions as to orders and extent of Part IV.)

Amendment made:

In page 52, line 16, at the end, insert the words:
(2) An Order made under this Part of this Act shall not be construed as affecting the limits of any Parliamentary county or Parliamentary borough."—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

CLAUSE 62.—(Relief from rates in respect of industrial and freight transport hereditaments.)

Amendments made:

In page 53, line 34, leave out the words "principal Act," and insert instead thereof the words "Rating and Valuation Act, 1925."

In page 54, line 11, after the word "and," insert the words "subject as hereinafter provided."

In line 13, at the end, insert the words:
Provided that if in any rating area the date of the first new valuation under the Rating and Valuation Act, 1925, has been postponed by Order of the Minister until a date later than the first day of April, nineteen hundred and twenty-nine, and by reason of the postponement the period in respect of which any such rate as aforesaid was made does not coincide with the period or periods by reference to which the estimates for the rate were prepared, the amount in the pound of the rate shall be apportioned between the first part of the period in respect of which the rate was made and the remainder thereof by the rating authority with the approval of the Minister, having regard to the period or periods for which the said estimates were prepared, and the rating authority shall, as soon as may be after the making of the rate, issue a certificate showing the apportionment so made.
(3).

In line 17, leave out the word "this," and insert instead thereof the words "the last foregoing."—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

CLAUSE 63.—(Amendment of valuation lists on or after appointed day and making of subsequent lists.)

Amendment made:

In page 54, leave out from the word "day," in line 18, to the word "become," in line 21, and insert instead thereof the words:
the fact of any hereditament in the county of London having, in the course of any year."—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

CLAUSE 64.—(Valuation of agricultural dwelling houses.)

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I beg to move, in page 56 to leave out from the word "land," in line 2, to the end of line 3, and to insert instead thereof the words:
in the service of the occupier thereof and is entitled, whether as tenant or otherwise, so to use the house only while so employed.

Mr. MARDY JONES: This Amendment stands in the name of the Minister of Agriculture, who is not now in the House. The Guillotine has fallen, and we have no opportunity to discuss any of these things. Why is it that a Minister is not sufficiently interested to move his own Amendment?

Mr. SPEAKER: That question cannot arise at this stage.

Amendment agreed to.

CLAUSE 65.—(Removal of limit on borrowing powers of local authorities.)

Amendment made:

In page 56, line 13, at the end, insert the words:
(2) Paragraph (3) of Section two hundred and thirty-four of the Public Health Act, 1375 (which, subject to the suspension thereof by the Local Authorities (Emergency Provisions) Acts, 1923 to 1925, prohibits the Minister from sanctioning a loan in certain cases until one or his inspectors has held a local inquiry and reported to the Minister), is hereby repealed as from the appointed day."—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

CLAUSE 67.—(Adaptation of enactments relating to the adjustment of parochial balances.)

Amendment made:

In page 57, line 12, leave out the words "appointed day," and insert instead thereof the words "first day of April, nineteen hundred and thirty "

CLAUSE 69.—(Adaptation of enactments relating to drainage rates.)

The following Amendments stood upon the Order Paper in the name of Mr. GUINNESS:

In page 57, line 38, leave out the words "or may"

In page 58, line 9, at the end, insert the words:
(3) Where by any enactment, including this Section, the amount of any drainage rate is to be determined by reference to the gross annual value of any property for Income Tax purposes, then, if the property is not assessed for Income Tax purposes under Schedule A of the Income Tax Act, 1918, as amended by any subsequent enactment, the value thereof shall, as from the appointed day, be determined in the event of any dispute by a court of summary jurisdiction.

Mr. SPEAKER: With regard to the Amendments, standing in the name of the right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Agriculture, I have my doubts as to whether they are in order or not, and therefore I am afraid I cannot put them.

The MINISTER of AGRICULTURE (Mr. Guinness): Am I in order in explaining that this Amendment does not in any way increase the liability on a ratepayer?

Mr. MARDY JONES: Can the Minister, or anybody else, explain anything at this stage?

Mr. SPEAKER: No, I did not propose to allow the Minister to explain the Amendment.

Mr. BENN: May I ask whether you have the power to reject any Government Amendment? The Resolution of the House directs that you shall put Government Amendments from the Chair, and I would ask whether, under the terms of that Resolution, for which we are not responsible, the Chair has power to reject any Amendment?

Mr. SPEAKER: I must exercise common sense and not put Amendments which would be out of order, whatever the Resolution may say.

CLAUSE 71.—(Adaptation of 7 and 8 Geo. 5. c. 64. s. 41 (9).)

Amendment made:

In page 59, line 6, after the word "list," insert the words:
but the value thereof is assessed under Schedule A of the Income Tax Act, 1918, as amended by any subsequent enactment."—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

CLAUSE 75.—(Citation and construction of Part V.)

Amendment made:

In page 61, leave out from the word "Act," in line 33, to the second word "and," in line 34, and insert instead thereof the words:
means, in relation to places outside London, the Rating and Valuation Act, 1925, as amended by any subsequent enactment, and in relation to London, the Valuation (Metropolis) Act, 1889, as so amended as aforesaid."—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

CLAUSE 76.—(Discontinuance of grants.)

Mr. SPEAKER: I do not select the first Amendment, standing in the name of the hon. Member for Nelson and Colne (Mr. Greenwood)—to leave out the Clause—and the next two Amendments—in the name of the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown)—in page 62, line 5, after the word "grants," to insert the words:
payable out of the Consolidated Fund or the growing produce thereof into the local taxation account, and.
and in page 62, line 5, after the second word "the," to insert the words "first part of the "—and the Amendment standing in the name of the hon. Member for North Kensington (Mr. Gates)—in page 62, line 9, at the end, to insert the words:
Provided always that the grants for maternity and child welfare shall not be discontinued grants until the end of seven years from the appointed day"—
would impose a charge and therefore are out of order.

CLAUSE 77.—(Payment and apportion-of General Exchequer Contributions.)

Mr. SPEAKER: I do not select the first Amendment, standing in the name of the hon. Member for West Leicester (Mr. Pethick-Lawrence)—to leave out the Clause—and the Amendments in the names of the hon. Member for Leith (Mr. E. Brown)—in page 63, line 21, after the word "losses," insert the words "in each year," and of the hon. Member for Merthyr Tydvil (Mr. Wallhead)—in page 64, line 19, leave out from the beginning, to the word "the," in line 26—would impose a charge and are consequently out of order. I have had several manuscript Amendments handed in to me during this Debate. The House will realise that in conducting a Bill of this kind through the Report stage it is difficult to give that full attention to manuscript Amendments which one would like to give, and to come to a decision as to whether they are in order or not; but I have done what I could, with the best will in the world to meet the views of hon. Members who have put in these Amendments, and I have come to the conclusion that all of them are out of order.

CLAUSE 92.—(Contributions by councils to voluntary associations in respect of other health services.)

Sir K. WOOD: I beg to move, in page 75, line 38, after the word "period," to insert the words:
after consultation with the county and county borough councils concerned or with the associations representing those councils.
This Amendment is moved in order to give effect to undertakings which have been given by the Minister of Health in answer to requests from all parts of the House.

Amendment agreed to.

Consequential Amendment made.

CLAUSE 94.—(Power to reduce grants.)

Sir K. WOOD: I beg to move, in page 76, to leave out from the word
"just," in line 28, to the word "that," in line 30, and to insert instead thereof the words:
"if,
(a) he is satisfied, either upon representations made to him by any association or other body of persons experienced or interested in matters relating to public health or without any such representations.
This Amendment is moved in order to make it plain that the Minister can take action, not only on his own initiative, hut on representations made to him any association or other body of persons experienced or interested in these matters. This request has been pressed from all quarters of the House, and my right hon. Friend is meeting the wishes of hon. Members.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made:

In page 77, line 4, at the beginning, insert the words "(b) he is satisfied."

In page 77, line 8, leave out the word "if."—[Sir K. Wood.]

Ordered, "That further Consideration of the Bill, as amended, be now adjourned.—[Mr. Chamberlain.]

Bill, as amended, to be further considered To-morrow.

Orders of the Day — DERBY CORPORATION BILL. (By Order.)

Read a Second time, and committed.

Mr. HANNON: I desire to move an Instruction to the Committee on this Bill.

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member has not given notice of an Instruction, and therefore he cannot move it.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

ADJOURNMENT.

Resolved, "That this House do now adjourn."—[Sir W. Cope.]

Adjourned accordingly at Ten Minutes before Eight o'Clock.